NationStates Jolt Archive

http://start.earthlink.net/newsarticle?cat=1&aid=D854BA8O1_story

Bush: I promise to create 6 million new jobs!

America: Um, where are they?

Bush: Okay, even though I didn't do anything to create jobs in my first term, I promise my 2nd term will be better.

America: So what are you going to do different?

Bush: Nothing. I'm no flip-flopper!

LOL!

Ultimately, Bush's entire economic philosophy seems based upon what his own father called, "voodoo economics." Why is it necessary to stimulate the supply side when there is absolutely no lack in productive capacity? The real problem is in the "demand side," but stimulating that wouldn't involve a massive giveaway for his campaign contributors, would it? ;)

LOL!

Ultimately, Bush's entire economic philosophy seems based upon what his own father called, "voodoo economics." Why is it necessary to stimulate the supply side when there is absolutely no lack in productive capacity? The real problem is in the "demand side," but stimulating that wouldn't involve a massive giveaway for his campaign contributors, would it? ;)

I couldn't have said it better myself.

i agree with Gymoore completely. where is all the things that Bush promised us? The economy is at it's worse!! There are no jobs even for people that spend years in school. But I guess he doesn't have to worry about that because there's no food coming out of his mouth. America is losing money for schools to go fight wars. He's definitely lost my vote.

Bush? Economy? Bad?

oh well yeah you guys may be right. YOU FOUND A FLAW. but look at what else you have other than bush. KERRY. look at what they found out. about him. HE'S a lyin man. All the things he promised they found that not all can be done with the mony that the USA has. It is just impossable. I don't know about you but one flaw that happend is better then lookin at all the ones that are could be to come. As they say "you learn from your mistakes"

But I make more than ever :p

oh well yeah you guys may be right. YOU FOUND A FLAW. but look at what else you have other than bush. KERRY. look at what they found out. about him. HE'S a lyin man. All the things he promised they found that not all can be done with the mony that the USA has. It is just impossable. I don't know about you but one flaw that happend is better then lookin at all the ones that are could be to come. As they say "you learn from your mistakes"

You know, every politician promises things he can't do. The thing is, most politicians don't screw up things as Royally as George W.

You also call Kerry a liar. Cite one example. Cambodia? Damn, Kerry was off by two month, what an evil fucker.

Next, find all the things Bush lied about.

If you think Bush is more honest than Kerry, then YOU'RE lying. To yourself.

Actually the economy is doing rather well considering we are at war. I for one have seen an increase in buying, and therefore an increase in my paycheck. I believe the last time I looked that the unemployment rate is about 5% (?). If you consider that a good portion of those unemployed WANT to be unemployed and remain that way in order to sap the government, then the percentage really is lower than that. Heck, even if it were 15%, that's really not that bad all things considered. I know that when I look in the newspaper, there are plenty of jobs. Sure, a lot of them are crappy, but you do what you must for as long as you must until something else comes along. Or you get off your ass and MAKE a job! People are doing it, and it can be done. Nobody is better than anybody else. If I can take three buses and walk a half a mile to work in the freezing cold, doing work that I hate for about three years, so can some other lazy ass.

Bad economy -- BAH!

...considering we are at war.

Shut the Fuck up.

Shut the Fuck up.

Oooooh, I can just hear the intelligence oozing from you. Heheheheh.

Expand your vocabulary.

I'm sorry, but if I hear "we are at war" one more time I'm going to go insane.

Actually the economy is doing rather well considering we are at war. I for one have seen an increase in buying, and therefore an increase in my paycheck. I believe the last time I looked that the unemployment rate is about 5% (?). If you consider that a good portion of those unemployed WANT to be unemployed and remain that way in order to sap the government, then the percentage really is lower than that. Heck, even if it were 15%, that's really not that bad all things considered. I know that when I look in the newspaper, there are plenty of jobs. Sure, a lot of them are crappy, but you do what you must for as long as you must until something else comes along. Or you get off your ass and MAKE a job! People are doing it, and it can be done. Nobody is better than anybody else. If I can take three buses and walk a half a mile to work in the freezing cold, doing work that I hate for about three years, so can some other lazy ass.

Bad economy -- BAH!

Yeah, wars seem to be bad for the economy. Oh, wait, no they're not! Quite the opposite! Your "excuse" is only a further indictment of the Bush economic plan.

You know, every politician promises things he can't do. The thing is, most politicians don't screw up things as Royally as George W.

You also call Kerry a liar. Cite one example. Cambodia? Damn, Kerry was off by two month, what an evil fucker.

Next, find all the things Bush lied about.

If you think Bush is more honest than Kerry, then YOU'RE lying. To yourself.
*Runs in*
Look at Bush's proposed economic plan. He LEFT OUT the Iraq and Afghanistan wars because he was "unsure" how much it would cost.
http://www.centrists.org/pages/2004/08/4_lemieux_budget.html

I have a question.

What is enough..

What do you think the President should show up on your door step to give you personally.. and while he is there .. what would be enough for you to not complain that there could have been more..

It is the same ??? I have for the Congress and IRS ... how much of my money to you have to have as a percentage to never come back and tell me you need more..

Simple question.. So what is enough??

I have a question.

What is enough..

What do you think the President should show up on your door step to give you personally.. and while he is there .. what would be enough for you to not complain that there could have been more..

It is the same ??? I have for the Congress and IRS ... how much of my money to you have to have as a percentage to never come back and tell me you need more..

Simple question.. So what is enough??

Presumably, you are a Bush supporter. I suggest that you answer your own question: What is enough?

What is enough when it comes to the big giveaways, the corporate welfare, the largesse for major campaign contributors?

I have absolutely no interest in Mister Bush giving me anything; I simply don't want him taking what I have earned and giving it to those who need not.

It it too much to ask that our nation have a sane, sensible economic/fiscal policy?

It's not about jobs or spending or supply-side vs demand-side. It's about wealth. The government is destroying wealth. It will continue to do so whether Bush is re-elected or not.

http://start.earthlink.net/newsarticle?cat=1&aid=D854BA8O1_story

Bush: I promise to create 6 million new jobs!

America: Um, where are they?

Bush: Okay, even though I didn't do anything to create jobs in my first term, I promise my 2nd term will be better.

America: So what are you going to do different?

Bush: Nothing. I'm no flip-flopper!
I find all of this kind of ironic. Bush ponies up with $730 Billion in "tax cuts", mostly geared to the wealthiest Americans and what have they done with this windfall? I imagine they are all waiting for the market to improve before investing in the Bush ideology. Too bad, so sad. :eek:

As they say "you learn from your mistakes"
Bush = mistake

It it too much to ask that our nation have a sane, sensible economic/fiscal policy?

Too much to ask? No.

Too much to ask of Bush? Yes.

Actually the economy is doing rather well considering we are at war. I for one have seen an increase in buying, and therefore an increase in my paycheck. I believe the last time I looked that the unemployment rate is about 5% (?). If you consider that a good portion of those unemployed WANT to be unemployed and remain that way in order to sap the government, then the percentage really is lower than that. Heck, even if it were 15%, that's really not that bad all things considered. I know that when I look in the newspaper, there are plenty of jobs. Sure, a lot of them are crappy, but you do what you must for as long as you must until something else comes along. Or you get off your ass and MAKE a job! People are doing it, and it can be done. Nobody is better than anybody else. If I can take three buses and walk a half a mile to work in the freezing cold, doing work that I hate for about three years, so can some other lazy ass.

Bad economy -- BAH!
Yup, it sure looks like the economy is just a smokkin'

Yeah okay:

http://www.jobwatch.org/ima/20040903_2changeintotalemp650.gif

There are more charts and they all say the same thing. :eek:

Hey America!! "get off your ass and MAKE a job" NOW!!!

Too much to ask? No.

Too much to ask of Bush? Yes.

Quote of the day!

Yup, it sure looks like the economy is just a smokkin'

Yeah okay:

http://www.jobwatch.org/ima/20040903_2changeintotalemp650.gif

There are more charts and they all say the same thing. :eek:

Hey America!! "get off your ass and MAKE a job" NOW!!!

Doesn't seem like any wars interfered with those recoveries.

http://start.earthlink.net/newsarticle?cat=1&aid=D854BA8O1_story

Bush: I promise to create 6 million new jobs!

America: Um, where are they?

Bush: Okay, even though I didn't do anything to create jobs in my first term, I promise my 2nd term will be better.

America: So what are you going to do different?

Bush: Nothing. I'm no flip-flopper!

You must clearly not understand Reaganomics, then. You see, according to the chart that I've just scribbled on this notepaper, all such recoveries are parabolic in nature. Once you've lost enough jobs, you hit the bottom of the equation, and then it's all up and up and up!

Ahhh, just over forty more days, and the lib dims will be dead for another four years Muahahaha. I'm not even thinking of Kerry as having a pulse at this point. I wonder if we can get 60+ in the Senate for once...hmmm real possibility.

Supreme court IS going to remain conservative for a LONG time, as Bush will get to put TWO people on the bench, and Roe V. Wade will fall, as will most of your liberal crap....MUAHAHAHAHA

Life as we have known it will be forever changed, a new dawn is upon us. Lib dims are sooooo focused on Kerry, they have not even begun to see the big picture and realize everything they stand for is all but dead...MUAHAHAHAHA

I am soooo happy. I'll be able to rub it in your fat gay faces for years and years how you have no power, your ideas will shrivel on the vine, and your beliefs will be purged from the land...but France will welcome you in hordes...

Here libby libby libby....POW POW POW :sniper:

Hey Paw! I got me anuther un'. Wow, this un looks juss like that James Carville fella, I was wonderin' what ever happen ta him...yuck yuck yuck...

You must clearly not understand Reaganomics, then. You see, according to the chart that I've just scribbled on this notepaper, all such recoveries are parabolic in nature. Once you've lost enough jobs, you hit the bottom of the equation, and then it's all up and up and up!
Once you hit rock bottom, you've got no place else to go!

Ahhh, just over forty more days, and the lib dims will be dead for another four years Muahahaha. I'm not even thinking of Kerry as having a pulse at this point. I wonder if we can get 60+ in the Senate for once...hmmm real possibility.

Supreme court IS going to remain conservative for a LONG time, as Bush will get to put TWO people on the bench, and Roe V. Wade will fall, as will most of your liberal crap....MUAHAHAHAHA

Life as we have known it will be forever changed, a new dawn is upon us. Lib dims are sooooo focused on Kerry, they have not even begun to see the big picture and realize everything they stand for is all but dead...MUAHAHAHAHA

I am soooo happy. I'll be able to rub it in your fat gay faces for years and years how you have no power, your ideas will shrivel on the vine, and your beliefs will be purged from the land...but France will welcome you in hordes...

Here libby libby libby....POW POW POW :sniper:

Hey Paw! I got me anuther un'. Wow, this un looks juss like that James Carville fella, I was wonderin' what ever happen ta him...yuck yuck yuck...Democracy at its finest. Even the idiots get a say.

Ahhh, just over forty more days, and the lib dims will be dead for another four years Muahahaha. I'm not even thinking of Kerry as having a pulse at this point. I wonder if we can get 60+ in the Senate for once...hmmm real possibility.

Supreme court IS going to remain conservative for a LONG time, as Bush will get to put TWO people on the bench, and Roe V. Wade will fall, as will most of your liberal crap....MUAHAHAHAHA

Life as we have known it will be forever changed, a new dawn is upon us. Lib dims are sooooo focused on Kerry, they have not even begun to see the big picture and realize everything they stand for is all but dead...MUAHAHAHAHA

I am soooo happy. I'll be able to rub it in your fat gay faces for years and years how you have no power, your ideas will shrivel on the vine, and your beliefs will be purged from the land...but France will welcome you in hordes...

Here libby libby libby....POW POW POW :sniper:

Hey Paw! I got me anuther un'. Wow, this un looks juss like that James Carville fella, I was wonderin' what ever happen ta him...yuck yuck yuck...

::shakes head, walks away::

Quote of the day!

Thank you. :p

You must clearly not understand Reaganomics, then. You see, according to the chart that I've just scribbled on this notepaper, all such recoveries are parabolic in nature. Once you've lost enough jobs, you hit the bottom of the equation, and then it's all up and up and up!
Something tells me that this is very deep reasoning? Is Bush's parabola different than Reagan's? The numbers don't seem to be adding up, up, up.

Something tells me that this is very deep reasoning? Is Bush's parabola different than Reagan's? The numbers don't seem to be adding up, up, up.He read the graph upside down

Note that when people give up trying to find a job, they're no longer considered "unemployed", as they've left the job sector.

You could have fewer jobs than before but if people stopped trying and fell down to welfare, the employment rate would go up.

Consider this little bit of incredible news:

http://www.inequality.org/warandtaxcuts.html

MORE AMERICANS HAVE died in Iraq than in all U.S. military operations since Vietnam combined. Some states have reported their first National Guard combat deaths since World War II. The Bush administration expects tens of thousands of troops to be in Iraq well past next year.

Reserve and Guard members on extended duty in Iraq and Afghanistan have lost savings, homes and businesses. Now the Army is recalling thousands of honorably discharged soldiers who served less than eight years on active duty.

Meanwhile, millionaires are getting tax breaks.

Tax cuts for the richest 1 percent of Americans are costing about as much this year as the combined budgets for Veterans Affairs, Energy, Environmental Protection and Homeland Security. The Bush administration's "Planning Guidance for the FY 2006 Budget" projects cutbacks in all those areas plus education, housing, health care and nearly every domestic responsibility..........

IN 2004, HOUSEHOLDS with incomes above $1 million will receive tax cuts averaging $123,600. That will cause their after-tax income to jump by more than 6 percent, says the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.

Tax cuts for the wealthy are stimulating budget cutbacks, deficits and an increasingly flat tax burden. In 2004, the richest 1 percent -- with an average income of nearly $1 million -- will pay 32.8 percent of their income in all federal, state and local taxes combined. The other 99 percent -- with an average income of $47,500 -- will pay just a little less, at 29.4 percent, Citizens for Tax Justice reports.

Already enacted tax cuts for the wealthiest 1 percent will cost more than $1 trillion in 2001-2010. That translates into more than $300 million in lost revenues every day for ten years. Some shared sacrifice.

The administration's revised "Patterns of Global Terrorism" shows the number of significant terrorist attacks reached a 20-year high in 2003. U.S. troops are overtaxed abroad. Police and fire stations, schools and emergency rooms are understaffed at home. The nation is sinking deeper into a quagmire of debt.

Yet, the administration and its congressional allies are pushing even more tax cuts for high-income Americans. More tax cuts at a time when higher education has become more out of reach financially for low-income Americans -- unless they join the military.

The Bush tax cuts are widening the gap between the children of millionaires and the children of soldiers, few of them from wealthy families. The soldiers' children will have even less opportunity for higher education and career ladders outside the military than their parents did.

More and more Americans realize the Iraq war is based on false premises. Unless Bush's similarly misguided tax policies are reversed, we will pay for his mistakes for generations to come.

Hail to the Chief!!

i agree with Gymoore completely. where is all the things that Bush promised us? The economy is at it's worse!! There are no jobs even for people that spend years in school. But I guess he doesn't have to worry about that because there's no food coming out of his mouth. America is losing money for schools to go fight wars. He's definitely lost my vote.


hmmm lets see why there are no jobs for people who spend years in school. maybe its because now everyone goes and spends years in school to get a degree 20 million other people have so they have to go and get a masters. Then something that only a few proffesionals had previously becomes essentialy worthless meaning people have to get more degrees.

Now if say someone wanted to become a plumber or electrician they can go to a 1 or 2 year technical school for a quarter of the price of college. Then after 3-5 years once they get the hang of the industry can start earning more money then a supposed "educated" person.

Why is this so? Because theres a need for PLUMBERS and ELECTRICIANS. They offer a speciality skill that most people are advised not to go into because its considered an "uneducated" job even though they are making more money then college educated person. But since we live in a society that says "If you dont have a college degree you wont be able to provide for your family." So as a result we have a society with a surplus of people with English degrees and a lack of technicians. So the educated person has less value now then the person capable of fixing a roof, installing wires or operating heavy machinery.

Note that when people give up trying to find a job, they're no longer considered "unemployed", as they've left the job sector.

You could have fewer jobs than before but if people stopped trying and fell down to welfare, the employment rate would go up.

Workers not in the labor force, but who want a job?

1996 - 5.779 million
2004 - 4.705

Unemployment rate?

1996 - 5.5%
2004 - 5.6%

Of those unemployed 27 weeks or longer?

1996 - 18.8%
2004 - 18.2%

Home Ownership rate?

1996 - 65.1%
2004 - 69.2%

30-year fixed rate?

1996 - 8.25%
2004 - 6.06%

Debt % of GDP?

1996 - 48.5%
2004 - 37.5%

Americans without health insurance?

1996 - 15.6%
2004 - 15.6%

Federal Financial Aid for college (both in 2002 dollars)

1996 - 446 Billion Dollars
2004 - 716 Billion Dollars

Charitable Giving?

1996 - 150.7 Billion Dollars
2004 - 241 Billion Dollars

Now with all of these FACTS...is it any wonder why the polls are running exactly the opposite of what your spewing out of your mouth? You can claim that the people are falling off of the data chart as they have been unemployed so long, but WHALLA....there is an actual FACTUAL record of such people, and it is FACTUALLY lower than the same period when Clinton ran for RE-ELECTION. When he did it, he was a god, when we do it, well, it just isn't good enough, it is actually bad, real bad, really really bad, it is scary. Bush has done better than CLinton in all of these, and many many many more areas, I just got sick of pointing them out at this point.

Is everything perfect? NOPE! Far from it, but is everything scary or bad, bad, really bad? NOPE! Stop the drama queen candadicay and tell us what your boy Scarry Kerry is actually wanting to do. I'm sick of you guys just hooking a link to his site also. Why not show some independantly verifiable data, and not is advertising campaign machine.

Love ya mean it...

Consider this little bit of incredible news:

http://www.inequality.org/warandtaxcuts.html

MORE AMERICANS HAVE [i]died in Iraq than in all U.S. military operations since Vietnam combined. Some states have reported their first National Guard combat deaths since World War II. The Bush administration expects tens of thousands of troops to be in Iraq well past next year.

Reserve and Guard members on extended duty in Iraq and Afghanistan have lost savings, homes and businesses. Now the Army is recalling thousands of honorably discharged soldiers who served less than eight years on active duty.


Well considering every major combat op since vietnam have been basically 12 hour wars you cant go by the statistics. If say 500 soldiers died in Panama and the war took say 6 months to resolve it would be a more reliable comparision.

And you know im tired of people complaining about the hardships put on reservesist and guard members. They all go to sign up when theres peace and put in there weekend a month and they get an extra paycheck everyweek so there happy. But once they are needed and are to be called up they raise bloody hell how its not fair. They signed up to go to war not to sit at home and get a check everyweek for a weekend of work.
Also most of those discharged being called up had arranged to be discharged early and ussually when that is done a clause is put in to allow for them to be called back to activity duty if there needed to fulfill there contractual obligation. But they rather get out early and get extra benefits and think there never will be a war.

Well considering every major combat op since vietnam have been basically 12 hour wars you cant go by the statistics. If say 500 soldiers died in Panama and the war took say 6 months to resolve it would be a more reliable comparision.

And you know im tired of people complaining about the hardships put on reservesist and guard members. They all go to sign up when theres peace and put in there weekend a month and they get an extra paycheck everyweek so there happy. But once they are needed and are to be called up they raise bloody hell how its not fair. They signed up to go to war not to sit at home and get a check everyweek for a weekend of work.
Also most of those discharged being called up had arranged to be discharged early and ussually when that is done a clause is put in to allow for them to be called back to activity duty if there needed to fulfill there contractual obligation. But they rather get out early and get extra benefits and think there never will be a war.


Just to support your point. I spent 8 years in Special Ops USMC, and during the first Gulf war, my contract expired....some 9 months later I got to go home, after being there a total of 14 months. I didn't cry about it. I did what everyone in my unit always did, I went to bed every night and "Prayed for war." Now I know these soft footed pussy's that join today are crying like babies taken off their momma's tit for the first time, but who gives a damn. If you want to end up like a wet stain of shit running down your mommy's leg, stay home. If you want to go and fight for your country, eat shit, sleep in a hole filled with shit, and when you actually have to take a shit, you walk around with it hanging half out your ass for two days, then join the Corps. Otherwise join the damn National Guard and spend your entire military career whinning like a faggot that didn't get a reach around.

And before you even think of crying about my language, consider this. This is reality, life and what you can expect when people are trying to blow your nuts off so they can use them for an ashtray. I know the 1st Civ Div (Civilian Division) is full of a bunch of college monkeys that think serving their country is spamming the boards with antiwar bullshit, meanwhile real Americans are dying for what they believe in, and you disgrace them with your whinny attitudes. Lead follow or get the hell out of the way...your slowing down the wheels of progress and we have towelheads to kill...

:sniper: :sniper: :sniper: :mp5: :mp5: :gundge: :gundge:

Workers not in the labor force, but who want a job?

1996 - 5.779 million
2004 - 4.705

Unemployment rate?

1996 - 5.5%
2004 - 5.6%

Of those unemployed 27 weeks or longer?

1996 - 18.8%
2004 - 18.2%

Home Ownership rate?

1996 - 65.1%
2004 - 69.2%

30-year fixed rate?

1996 - 8.25%
2004 - 6.06%

Debt % of GDP?

1996 - 48.5%
2004 - 37.5%

Americans without health insurance?

1996 - 15.6%
2004 - 15.6%

Federal Financial Aid for college (both in 2002 dollars)

1996 - 446 Billion Dollars
2004 - 716 Billion Dollars

Charitable Giving?

1996 - 150.7 Billion Dollars
2004 - 241 Billion Dollars

Now with all of these FACTS...is it any wonder why the polls are running exactly the opposite of what your spewing out of your mouth? You can claim that the people are falling off of the data chart as they have been unemployed so long, but WHALLA....there is an actual FACTUAL record of such people, and it is FACTUALLY lower than the same period when Clinton ran for RE-ELECTION. When he did it, he was a god, when we do it, well, it just isn't good enough, it is actually bad, real bad, really really bad, it is scary. Bush has done better than CLinton in all of these, and many many many more areas, I just got sick of pointing them out at this point.

Is everything perfect? NOPE! Far from it, but is everything scary or bad, bad, really bad? NOPE! Stop the drama queen candadicay and tell us what your boy Scarry Kerry is actually wanting to do. I'm sick of you guys just hooking a link to his site also. Why not show some independantly verifiable data, and not is advertising campaign machine.

Love ya mean it...

Give me a day or so and I will tear your numbers apart!! :eek:

Starting by comparing the START of their 4 year term, say unemployment rates for example:

Clinton:

1993-01-01 7.3

1997-01-01 5.3

Unemployment DOWN 2%

Bush:

2001-01-01 4.2

2004-08-01 5.4

Unemployment UP 1.2%

I will return......

Give me a day or so and I will tear your numbers apart!! :eek:

Starting by comparing the START of their 4 year term, say unemployment rates for example:

1993-01-01 7.3

1997-01-01 5.3

Unemployment DOWN 4%
2001-01-01 4.2

2004-08-01 5.4

Unemployment UP 1.2%

I will return......


Ok lame brain, so it doesn't matter where the number are now at the same period. What matters to you is what the numbers where before they even started in the new job? Are you a complete moron or just stupid?

You can have your day to twist reality however you would like, that doesn't change the reality of the facts I posted. I did not twist them to make bush look good or bad. I simply posted what they were at the end of each term for both presidents. You like Clinton, so I used his numbers, you hate Bush, but I still used his numbers...guess what...you base your like or dislike on their personality and not the record as if that were the case, you would like Bush more...does that make an ounce of sense to you lameass? I doubt it...now go and twist reality for awhile, your worthless, and better yet, hopeless.

Give me a day or so and I will tear your numbers apart!! :eek:

Starting by comparing the START of their 4 year term, say unemployment rates for example:

Clinton:

1993-01-01 7.3

1997-01-01 5.3

Unemployment DOWN 2%

Bush:

2001-01-01 4.2

2004-08-01 5.4

Unemployment UP 1.2%

I will return......


While your at it, learn to add dumbnuts. Unemployment dropped under Clinton by 2% and not 4%. Typical, you guys have a good argument but can't even take it at face value, you take the liberty to double the number that is in your favor to begin with. Do you understand why you have a credibility gap? This is exactly why Americans don't trust liberals. They have a HUGE problem telling the truth, reporting facts, and being honest. They don't even know what the meaning of the word "is" is.

I had to edit my post, as you edited your post to correct your error, how mighty freakin' nice of you...

Ok lame brain, so it doesn't matter where the number are now at the same period. What matters to you is what the numbers where before they even started in the new job? Are you a complete moron or just stupid?

You can have your day to twist reality however you would like, that doesn't change the reality of the facts I posted. I did not twist them to make bush look good or bad. I simply posted what they were at the end of each term for both presidents. You like Clinton, so I used his numbers, you hate Bush, but I still used his numbers...guess what...you base your like or dislike on their personality and not the record as if that were the case, you would like Bush more...does that make an ounce of sense to you lameass? I doubt it...now go and twist reality for awhile, your worthless, and better yet, hopeless.
Well you wanted to compare after 4 years in office. Guess what? Bush is not even in the same ball park. So far Bush has -900,000 jobs. Clinton left office after 22 Million jobs were added to the US economy, so nice try with picking numbers that looked cute.

And if my brain is lame, what does that make........

While your at it, learn to add dumbnuts. Unemployment dropped under Clinton by 2% and not 4%. Typical, you guys have a good argument but can't even take it at face value, you take the liberty to double the number that is in your favor to begin with. Do you understand why you have a credibility gap? This is exactly why Americans don't trust liberals. They have a HUGE problem telling the truth, reporting facts, and being honest. They don't even know what the meaning of the word "is" is.
That is what I have...2%, what is YOUR problem?

Give me a day or so and I will tear your numbers apart!! :eek:

Starting by comparing the START of their 4 year term, say unemployment rates for example:

Clinton:

1993-01-01 7.3

1997-01-01 5.3

Unemployment DOWN 2%

Bush:

2001-01-01 4.2

2004-08-01 5.4

Unemployment UP 1.2%

I will return......

Flucuations in the market of a small amount of points that hardly have an effect on the economy. Now say if we had a 5% rise in unemployment that would be cause to worry.
Also considering the state of the country when unemployment went up 2 massive towers were knocked down basically getting rid of over 100 thousand jobs in manhattan in dozens of industries. This in turn caused fear to spread to the stock market which thrives in times of stability and calmness. In times of chaos and uncertainty people stop playing the market and invest in bonds. Financial investing in companies stopped and then companies that were thinking of expanding or thinking about restructing there department feared other attacks and in order to consolidate there assets started laying off workers or cancelling expansion plans. Hence the reason for the rise in unemployment.
Now since the situation in the U.S. is better people are more certain in the stockmarket so investing is going up and companies are starting to hire and expand again.

That is what I have...2%, what is YOUR problem?

You edited to correct it, so I have edited my comment...

This will be a fun exercize and I truly look forward to it because your arguments are baked, no matter how much you want to twist them to make Georgy look good, which btw is extremely difficult to do.

BTW, you forgot to mention that Bush paid hundreds of Billions of tax cut dollars to end up with -900,000 jobs. George Hoover Bush!! :eek:

Flucuations in the market of a small amount of points that hardly have an effect on the economy. Now say if we had a 5% rise in unemployment that would be cause to worry.
Also considering the state of the country when unemployment went up 2 massive towers were knocked down basically getting rid of over 100 thousand jobs in manhattan in dozens of industries. This in turn caused fear to spread to the stock market which thrives in times of stability and calmness. In times of chaos and uncertainty people stop playing the market and invest in bonds. Financial investing in companies stopped and then companies that were thinking of expanding or thinking about restructing there department feared other attacks and in order to consolidate there assets started laying off workers or cancelling expansion plans. Hence the reason for the rise in unemployment.
Now since the situation in the U.S. is better people are more certain in the stockmarket so investing is going up and companies are starting to hire and expand again.
Ahhh the gloating is easing and the excuses are creeping out. LMAO

This will be a fun exercize and I truly look forward to it because your arguments are baked, no matter how much you want to twist them to make Georgy look good, which btw is extremely difficult to do.

BTW, you forgot to mention that Bush paid hundreds of Billions of tax cut dollars to end up with -900,000 jobs. George Hoover Bush!! :eek:


you know you guys ever think that two massive towers falling down caused alot of those losses and not bush? Considering 100 thousand people worked in those towers and most of those people werent brought back to work in new offices by the companies.

Yeah, let's just haggle over a percentage point or two here and there and base the election on that. We will ignore that we have had two huge wars, as well as a global fight on terror. We created the largest governmental agency in the history of the country as a result of the world trade centers being obliterated. The financial center of our nation was wiped off of the face of the earth in a matter of minutes mere months into the presidents term.

Not to mention the president has had to fight libs/dims the entire time, which tantamount to fighting another war on terror.

Take your blind hatred goggles off buddy, stop being a lemming and atleast recognize some semblance of reality in perspective.

I'm not asking you to vote for a Republican, heaven forbid. I'm just saying you should really try to see the truth and reality. You can still vote against Bush, but ripping on the poor bastard for 2% unemployment difference from prior to them even starting in the job is about insane.

I hope your never going to try and get a seat on a bench anywhere when you grow up, your so biased you wouldn't make it past the secretary, let alone the get to a hearing.

This will be a fun exercize and I truly look forward to it because your arguments are baked, no matter how much you want to twist them to make Georgy look good, which btw is extremely difficult to do.

BTW, you forgot to mention that Bush paid hundreds of Billions of tax cut dollars to end up with -900,000 jobs. George Hoover Bush!! :eek:

You need to keep one thing in mind chump. Your going to put together this numbers thing to discredit Bush, and pretend that the numbers are not readily verifiable to anyone. I simply put a FEW numbers together. I have data that could cover any and every govornment expenditure since Bush took office. This means that you will do this circus routine for your point of view, and I will list the FACTS within mere minutes.

Do what you gotta do, but don't whine when your whacky view gets blown out of the water with facts.

Your supposed "facts" are just a bunch of bullshit. Go home and die.

When considering the damage Bush is doing to America, the economy is just the tip of the iceberg. Here's what else the shrub has done to earn my ire:

Encouraged more terrorist attacks by starting a war and alienating our allies.

Sent the DEA to arrest paralyzed medical marijuana patients because they aren't buying expensive prescription drugs from his big pharmaceutical contributors. Also sent the drug czar abroad to fight municipal marijuana initiatives.

The PATRIOT ACT. 'nuff said.

Withdrew from the ABM treaty. I guess he really does have a hard-on for war.

Withdrew from the Kyoto treaty to show utter contempt for the environment.

I'll think of more later...

Ahhh the gloating is easing and the excuses are creeping out. LMAO


Actually those are facts based on precedent and not excuses. If you follow the stockmarket anytime there is a cause uncertanity the market will either stay stable or will fall because investors want to see how things turn out before they invest millions in a venture. 9/11 is an extreme example of uncertainity no one knew what was going to happen next.

And these things happen all the time. Before presidential elections the stockmarket ussually drops a couple of points because investors hold off on making purchases until they know whats going to happen.

Hypothetically:Your not going to invest 5 million dollars in say an industry that wants to research cloning and one of the canidates is opposed to cloning and wants it to be heavily regulated. So as an investor you would wait the extra week to make sure the situation is favorable to you.

Yeah, let's just haggle over a percentage point or two here and there and base the election on that. We will ignore that we have had two huge wars, as well as a global fight on terror. We created the largest governmental agency in the history of the country as a result of the world trade centers being obliterated. The financial center of our nation was wiped off of the face of the earth in a matter of minutes mere months into the presidents term.

Not to mention the president has had to fight libs/dims the entire time, which tantamount to fighting another war on terror.

Take your blind hatred goggles off buddy, stop being a lemming and atleast recognize some semblance of reality in perspective.

I'm not asking you to vote for a Republican, heaven forbid. I'm just saying you should really try to see the truth and reality. You can still vote against Bush, but ripping on the poor bastard for 2% unemployment difference from prior to them even starting in the job is about insane.

I hope your never going to try and get a seat on a bench anywhere when you grow up, your so biased you wouldn't make it past the secretary, let alone the get to a hearing.

Look at the employment chart again. Korea and Vietnam didn't cause the loss of jobs.

The PATRIOT ACT. 'nuff said.

Withdrew from the ABM treaty. I guess he really does have a hard-on for war.

Withdrew from the Kyoto treaty to show utter contempt for the environment.

I'll think of more later...

I find it amazing how people rally about the patriot complaining how its a severe breach of civil libereties when 95% of the statutes listed in there will never be used or arent denying anyone rights. You know what if you want to find out how to make bombs on a library computer you should be investigated.

And if you want to see a law that violates your rights go look at the Rico law. thats guilt by association. But I guess since that targets old Italian men sitting in a cafe and not radical "misunderstood" fundamentalists its ok.

And allowing the U.S. to develop a counter measure against rogue states like NK.

And backing out of Kyoto saved the economy from being crippled.

Your supposed "facts" are just a bunch of bullshit. Go home and die.

When considering the damage Bush is doing to America, the economy is just the tip of the iceberg. Here's what else the shrub has done to earn my ire:

Encouraged more terrorist attacks by starting a war and alienating our allies.

Sent the DEA to arrest paralyzed medical marijuana patients because they aren't buying expensive prescription drugs from his big pharmaceutical contributors. Also sent the drug czar abroad to fight municipal marijuana initiatives.

The PATRIOT ACT. 'nuff said.

Withdrew from the ABM treaty. I guess he really does have a hard-on for war.

Withdrew from the Kyoto treaty to show utter contempt for the environment.

I'll think of more later...


Um no, they are not supposed facts, they are the actual numbers from the GAO. You not wanting to accept facts is something quit different. See where you and your Cunnuck buddy differ is he actually thinks he can compare numbers and win an argument. We all know that liberals never want to look at data to argue in the first place, as they always lose that argument. You instead throw out arguments based on emotion, such as "Patriot Act, nuff said." Well is it enough said? I hardly think so, I would say you said enough to indicate that your ignorant, uneducated, biased, and basing everything about you and your views as a person on mere emotions rather than rational.

nuff said?

Talk about the pot and the kettle.

You have had your stupid fascist ass handed to you twice already as far as statistics are concerned and all you can say is "My numbers are right and yours are wrong!" and point out mistakes in other people's posts that don't exist.

I challenge you this: Tell one of the million or so people who have lost jobs due to Bush's stupity how great his economic policies are (make sure you include his famous quote "Outsourcing of jobs is good for America") and see if you can aviod an ass-kicking. Good luck.

Look at the employment chart again. Korea and Vietnam didn't cause the loss of jobs.

Well if it isn't GayMore gymoor MoreGay...

Will you and John Kerry get off Vietnam already dewd? I doubt you were born when Vietnam happened for one thing, secondly a Democrat started that fucking war and not Nixon. Every Democrat points to that war as the big defining moment for Republicans, and they fail to mention your asshole leaders are the ones who got us into it in the first palce.

The best thing Republicans could have done at that time was to let the Democrats run unopposed so they couldn't blame their stupid actions on Republicans for the rest of my damn lifetime.

What is your point anyways? You make no sense, but then again I have no expectations you will either...don't answer that...

All I know is that there are a whole lot more companies hiring now than in 2001 when I got my BS. Looking for a job isn't nearly as disheartening as it used to be. Even my old man found a decent job, and he's a history major for god's sake.

talk about the pot and the kettle

That's about the 5th time I have heard that exact phrase from a lib as well in the last week. Your originality even sucks. Maybe you need to send a memo to Genine Garaffalo to come up with some new material.

Just for fun, here is another GAO FACT for you to whine about:

Hourly Compensation Growth (first term, inflation adjusted)

1996 - -0.4%
2004 - 4.5%

Well gee boys and girls, after 4 years of Bill Clinton you actually made less an hour every hour that you worked. But don't dispair, after G. W. you make almost 5% more an hour every hour that you work. Golly by golly, and if you would like I can provide the data that shows you keep more of that as well, and pay less in taxes by several days a year...woohoo

Perrien reminds me of that fat redneck from Southpark who says "Hey, if you don't like America you can geeet out!" when someone makes a fool of him.

http://start.earthlink.net/newsarticle?cat=1&aid=D854BA8O1_story

Bush: I promise to create 6 million new jobs!

America: Um, where are they?

Bush: Okay, even though I didn't do anything to create jobs in my first term, I promise my 2nd term will be better.

America: So what are you going to do different?

Bush: Nothing. I'm no flip-flopper!

My son used to work for Earthlink as a Tier II Tech Support person until Earthlink decided to ship all th jobs to Bangalore, India!

Yeah Bush created new jobs alright, it's just how they were created for India like....

Talk about the pot and the kettle.

You have had your stupid fascist ass handed to you twice already as far as statistics are concerned and all you can say is "My numbers are right and yours are wrong!" and point out mistakes in other people's posts that don't exist.

I challenge you this: Tell one of the million or so people who have lost jobs due to Bush's stupity how great his economic policies are (make sure you include his famous quote "Outsourcing of jobs is good for America") and see if you can aviod an ass-kicking. Good luck.

I didn't say my numbers are right and your are wrong. I know mine are right and his are manipulated using some retarded way of forcing me to look at it. Post the number side by side without a disclaimer making me look at it with the sun at 186 degrees from due north and the planets lining up. He made one post, I pointed out his mathematical error, then he goes back and edits that post and pretends there was no error...yet at the bottom of the post there is a little thing that says....pssst...edited....Like I keep saying you guys shoot yourself in the foot becuase you just can't tell the truth to win an argument. If your not exagerating everytime you open your mouths, your just flat out lying. You remind me of Dr. Cornealius on Planet of the Apes. You refuse anything you don't want to believe, regardless of whether you know the truth or not.

... but WHALLA....there is an actual FACTUAL record of such people...

I think you mean "voila."

Perrien reminds me of that fat redneck from Southpark who says "Hey, if you don't like America you can geeet out!" when someone makes a fool of him.

Makes a fool of me? Are you like 12 years old or something? I'm not even talking to an adult am I? I'm so stupid...my bad...

Please provide links to your sources for any statistics if you can, anyone. It would keep people from talking out of their ass or citing from obviously biased groups or what have you. Besides, the more info to work with, the better.

I didn't say my numbers are right and your are wrong. I know mine are right and his are manipulated using some retarded way of forcing me to look at it. Post the number side by side without a disclaimer making me look at it with the sun at 186 degrees from due north and the planets lining up. He made one post, I pointed out his mathematical error, then he goes back and edits that post and pretends there was no error...yet at the bottom of the post there is a little thing that says....pssst...edited....Like I keep saying you guys shoot yourself in the foot becuase you just can't tell the truth to win an argument. If your not exagerating everytime you open your mouths, your just flat out lying. You remind me of Dr. Cornealius on Planet of the Apes. You refuse anything you don't want to believe, regardless of whether you know the truth or not.

You've shot yourself in the foot more than anyone else here. Go away, you're embarassing yourself.

I think you mean "voila."

You know it to mean Viola, but I meant it as Whalla...it is Arabic...

You know it to mean Viola, but I meant it as Whalla...it is Arabic...

The lies some people come up with to hide their ineptitude.

Please provide links to your sources for any statistics if you can, anyone. It would keep people from talking out of their ass or citing from obviously biased groups or what have you. Besides, the more info to work with, the better.

You know what. I have no problem doing that, but everytime I ask for a link I get one to John Kerry's capaign website and told to look it up myself...well, I can say the same thing. I know I am not going to win over any converts here, I just like watching liberals confirm to me they have no clue what they are talking about. Maybe that's why they can't win an election in this country anymore

The lies some people come up with to hide their ineptitude.

My wife is Arabic you retard, Lebanese to be exact. Why don't you go on up to Michigan and ask anyone that lives around Dearborn what Whalla means...and Hullus while your at it lol

Mshulla

You've shot yourself in the foot more than anyone else here. Go away, you're embarassing yourself.

I just realised you have a total of ten posts...go away already little boy, you have no business here with the men.

And how exactly is my postcount relevant? Just because I have I better things to do most of the time (like working, something a stupid middle-schooler such as yourself would know nothing about) doesn't make me any less right or you any less wrong.

And how exactly is my postcount relevant? Just because I have I better things to do most of the time (like working, something a stupid middle-schooler such as yourself would know nothing about) doesn't make me any less right or you any less wrong.

It doesn't make you right or wrong, but it does mean you have little to no relevant facts to inject and all your interested in doing is flame baiting.

**grabs some soda, a roasting stick, and some marshmellows**

Don't mind me, you two! Just keep at it. Theeere we go. Oooooh, nice and toasty.

**grabs some soda, a roasting stick, and some marshmellows**

Don't mind me, you two! Just keep at it. Theeere we go. Oooooh, nice and toasty.

hahahaha

Edit:
Damn, I just realized, I wasted my 200th post to say "hahahaha"...what a waste...

Ahhh, just over forty more days, and the lib dims will be dead for another four years Muahahaha. I'm not even thinking of Kerry as having a pulse at this point. I wonder if we can get 60+ in the Senate for once...hmmm real possibility.

Supreme court IS going to remain conservative for a LONG time, as Bush will get to put TWO people on the bench, and Roe V. Wade will fall, as will most of your liberal crap....MUAHAHAHAHA

Life as we have known it will be forever changed, a new dawn is upon us. Lib dims are sooooo focused on Kerry, they have not even begun to see the big picture and realize everything they stand for is all but dead...MUAHAHAHAHA

I am soooo happy. I'll be able to rub it in your fat gay faces for years and years how you have no power, your ideas will shrivel on the vine, and your beliefs will be purged from the land...but France will welcome you in hordes...

Here libby libby libby....POW POW POW :sniper:

Hey Paw! I got me anuther un'. Wow, this un looks juss like that James Carville fella, I was wonderin' what ever happen ta him...yuck yuck yuck...

Anyone can infer from this pearl of wisdom that you do not have the intellect neccessary to form your own opinions. All the "facts" you posted you either made up or got from fox news or Rush Limbaugh. I doubt you can be older than 15. Come back when you get a job.

It's 12:58am and I have just finished reading this thread.
The differences of opinon and ability to express it are basic to our
forefathers vision of a free state. Unfortunately so much has been forgotton that should bring us together.
Our forefathers lived in a time when being naive
wasn't just a signal to take advantage of someone, it was a way of life.
People were in general much more respecting of one another and even
trusted a mans word, why, because it meant something. Instead of a welfare
state, people actually helped each other out, as long as they were willing to help themselves. What a novel idea. We no longer live in those days, today we seem to live in the land of ME, we are all so concerned with what do I get out of it, or as long as nothing bad happens to me, my friends or family, I'm ok. It is a disgusting and weak state of affairs when people so blessed to live in this great country forget not just what got them here, but the ideals behind freedom. The concept of freedom doesn't work without the integrity of the people, and the leaders who are willingly bound to serve those people.
We have within our grasp the very makings of greatness for each one of us in this country, yet as we complain about not having enough jobs, or enough money, we would deny others even a glimpse of that hope that we take for granted as what is owed us only because it might cost lives or god forbid, it may just cost money. What is even more frightening about all of this? That the same people who demand whats theirs, many without even working for it,
are the same people who would condemn others because they just don't do enough for those less fortunate. Our problems aren't solved in one election, or one war. Our problems will begin to be solved when we face up to our very fortunate situation and stop asking what's in it for me, but rather, what can I do to help. Sometimes the answer is spending time, or money. Sometimes it requires the ultimate sacrifice. In the end we all must do our part, Freedom, Prosperity, and the Pursuit of Happiness are not free, They are bought, and in most cases, at some point in time, Blood was shed for what we accept as our just due. :(

Rob

Anyone can infer from this pearl of wisdom that you do not have the intellect neccessary to form your own opinions. All the "facts" you posted you either made up or got from fox news or Rush Limbaugh. I doubt you can be older than 15. Come back when you get a job.

Ohio... Bush 52%, Kerry 42%
Florida... Bush 51%, Kerry 46%
Wisconsin... Bush 52%, Kerry 44%

Now this:
Illinois... Kerry 49%, Bush 45%
New Jersey... Bush 49%, Kerry 45% (2000 result: Gore by 15.8%!)

Also he is within single digits in New York. I didn't get any from Fox News and I have never been to Rush's site, as he is just annoying. I don't like anyone as one sided as he is either. I just like some facts with my reasoning.

IF the numbers were reversed I would be totally saying Kerry were going to kill Bush. If they changed ideology, I would totally be a Democrat. I'm very willing to change, but you first have to show me the rational for wanting to do so. At this point, I have no choice but to support Bush, not to do so is childish.

In terms of margin, that makes 53 electoral votes that are approximately 1.5% away from red territory. By contrast, New Hampshire, with its 4 EVs, is the only state on Bush's side within that same margin.

In other words...Kerry will lose some of those 53 EV's and Bush is in position with virtually nothing to lose. That means Bush could win well over 300 EV's, possibly closer to 400...

I doubt that would happen, don't get me wrong...but what looks good for Kerry? Trying to hit 200 would be a miracle at this stage lol

Well if it isn't GayMore gymoor MoreGay...

Will you and John Kerry get off Vietnam already dewd? I doubt you were born when Vietnam happened for one thing, secondly a Democrat started that fucking war and not Nixon. Every Democrat points to that war as the big defining moment for Republicans, and they fail to mention your asshole leaders are the ones who got us into it in the first palce.

The best thing Republicans could have done at that time was to let the Democrats run unopposed so they couldn't blame their stupid actions on Republicans for the rest of my damn lifetime.

What is your point anyways? You make no sense, but then again I have no expectations you will either...don't answer that...

My point, which is easily comprehensible if one has even the smallest familiarity with logical thought, is that other wars during other administrations didn't seem to have the negative effects with regard to employment that this one is. If you'd stop flinging your feces around your cage for a minute and think, you'd see that.
I made no judgement as to whether a Democrat or a Republican started a particular war, I merely pointed out that no other administration since Hoover, war or no war, has seen the disastrous employment record that this one has.

Now go back to boiling kittens or pulling the wings off of flies, or whatever it is you do when you're not spewing nonsense and inane attacks.

It's 12:58am and I have just finished reading this thread.
The differences of opinon and ability to express it are basic to our
forefathers vision of a free state. Unfortunately so much has been forgotton that should bring us together.
Our forefathers lived in a time when being naive
wasn't just a signal to take advantage of someone, it was a way of life.
People were in general much more respecting of one another and even
trusted a mans word, why, because it meant something. Instead of a welfare
state, people actually helped each other out, as long as they were willing to help themselves. What a novel idea. We no longer live in those days, today we seem to live in the land of ME, we are all so concerned with what do I get out of it, or as long as nothing bad happens to me, my friends or family, I'm ok. It is a disgusting and weak state of affairs when people so blessed to live in this great country forget not just what got them here, but the ideals behind freedom. The concept of freedom doesn't work without the integrity of the people, and the leaders who are willingly bound to serve those people.
We have within our grasp the very makings of greatness for each one of us in this country, yet as we complain about not having enough jobs, or enough money, we would deny others even a glimpse of that hope that we take for granted as what is owed us only because it might cost lives or god forbid, it may just cost money. What is even more frightening about all of this? That the same people who demand whats theirs, many without even working for it,
are the same people who would condemn others because they just don't do enough for those less fortunate. Our problems aren't solved in one election, or one war. Our problems will begin to be solved when we face up to our very fortunate situation and stop asking what's in it for me, but rather, what can I do to help. Sometimes the answer is spending time, or money. Sometimes it requires the ultimate sacrifice. In the end we all must do our part, Freedom, Prosperity, and the Pursuit of Happiness are not free, They are bought, and in most cases, at some point in time, Blood was shed for what we accept as our just due. :(

Rob

Get a haircut you hippy!

Kidding!

Actually, I agree with you 100%.

ive seen alot of what people have to say about george bush and as an outsider (to america) i personally hope he doesnt come back for a second term. All hes done in iraq is kill a few foreigners and now the death toll for america has reached 1000 he should seriously think about pulling out. theres no way the iraqi people will just "bow down" and give in to the western democratic way of living. These people have been living under suddam huissain for quite a few years, they arent just going to change because america whooped their ass in international warfare. one other thing i have to add is, george bush promissed countrys that if they joined hi cause they would get a free trade agreement, and as shown by australia, it didnt happen. im glad new zealand stayed out of it.

who wants a trigger happy person at the head of a world superpower anyway?

http://maddox.xmission.com/bush.html

My point, which is easily comprehensible if one has even the smallest familiarity with logical thought, is that other wars during other administrations didn't seem to have the negative effects with regard to employment that this one is. If you'd stop flinging your feces around your cage for a minute and think, you'd see that.
I made no judgement as to whether a Democrat or a Republican started a particular war, I merely pointed out that no other administration since Hoover, war or no war, has seen the disastrous employment record that this one has.

Now go back to boiling kittens or pulling the wings off of flies, or whatever it is you do when you're not spewing nonsense and inane attacks.

The World Trade Center, Pentagon, and Airline Industries were not attacked and destroyed by the VietCong either GayMore...You atleast made your point more lear that time, but can you honestly think comparing Korea and Vietnam to today's world in which we are fighting for our very survival is practical? Do you not accpt the fact that if we lose the war on terror, our streets will become a combat zone much like the streets of Isreal. Do you not acknowledge that your family memebers, cousins and friends will almost daily be blown up on school buses and in shoping malls around this country if we fail to succeed?

I know that is hard to imagine for many people. I'm just basing my beliefs on the fact I have been to the Middle East, and I have fought in the Middle East, and I have even been shot (granted nothing like a near death experience or anything) in the Middle East.

We are not dealing with Mexicans comming across the border for a job here. We are talking about people that kill their own sisters if they flirt with a man. That is not an isolated incident, they do it in mass numbers, all the damn time. (granted much less now that Saddam and the Taliban are eliminated). You have little boys in those nations talk to their mothers like they are shit, just becuase they are males. A male has the right to do just about anything they want, until they grow up, then it is a scary tight rope act.

I'm no saint, and could care less if they all kill each other, but the problem is, they want you to live by those same standards, and are more than willing to kill you or whoever they must to make sure you do.

I don't think, regardless of all that has happened over the last 15 years, that Americans have a clue of what we are facing. I'm afraid it is going to take much more than Sept. 11 to wake the other half of this country up. Sadly, I think we are going to experience that, either at Indian Point, or San Onefre, or someplace similar, sooner than later.

http://maddox.xmission.com/bush.html

The link didn't work for me

Note that when people give up trying to find a job, they're no longer considered "unemployed", as they've left the job sector.

You could have fewer jobs than before but if people stopped trying and fell down to welfare, the employment rate would go up.


Excellent point!!!

Unfortunately the survey numbers do not agree with you.

Has it not occured to you that we are no longer a manufacturing based economy.

How many people do you know that are "consultants" vs getting a job at GM? cause I know a ton of people that used to be on payroll but now are contractors. from our network guy to one of my buddies that makes his living buying and selling transformes on ebay, to one of our girls that has decided it makes more sense for her to do our billing from home instead of commuting to work everyday. As far as the govt is concerned we lost jobs when the truth oif the matter is that we have more people doing work for us that we used to have. But they arent payroll jobs cause now they are private contractors.

The World Trade Center, Pentagon, and Airline Industries were not attacked and destroyed by the VietCong either GayMore...You atleast made your point more lear that time, but can you honestly think comparing Korea and Vietnam to today's world in which we are fighting for our very survival is practical? Do you not accpt the fact that if we lose the war on terror, our streets will become a combat zone much like the streets of Isreal. Do you not acknowledge that your family memebers, cousins and friends will almost daily be blown up on school buses and in shoping malls around this country if we fail to succeed?

I know that is hard to imagine for many people. I'm just basing my beliefs on the fact I have been to the Middle East, and I have fought in the Middle East, and I have even been shot (granted nothing like a near death experience or anything) in the Middle East.

We are not dealing with Mexicans comming across the border for a job here. We are talking about people that kill their own sisters if they flirt with a man. That is not an isolated incident, they do it in mass numbers, all the damn time. (granted much less now that Saddam and the Taliban are eliminated). You have little boys in those nations talk to their mothers like they are shit, just becuase they are males. A male has the right to do just about anything they want, until they grow up, then it is a scary tight rope act.

I'm no saint, and could care less if they all kill each other, but the problem is, they want you to live by those same standards, and are more than willing to kill you or whoever they must to make sure you do.

I don't think, regardless of all that has happened over the last 15 years, that Americans have a clue of what we are facing. I'm afraid it is going to take much more than Sept. 11 to wake the other half of this country up. Sadly, I think we are going to experience that, either at Indian Point, or San Onefre, or someplace similar, sooner than later.

you make some good points but i have to say, although these people feel very strongly about their beliefs, they arent the only religeon trying to force them on other people, everyone of them does. i also took into account that if you are as you say, a soldier and i respect you for this but, no country would invade america, its a suicide, they would have basically every country in the world come in in full force to rip out their throats, its not going to happen, alot of what you have been told by you commanding officers (just a guess) is propaganda, every country does it, its put out their so you not only dont think twice about killing a fellow human being you actually enjoy it.

all i really wanted to say here is...if a country really did want to commit national suicide, there are easier ways to do it than invading america.

by the way...insults dont actually help you get your point accross

my point exactly

cant believe a sixteen year old ended a politicle debate

Oooooh, I can just hear the intelligence oozing from you. Heheheheh.

Expand your vocabulary.
"we" are not at war. The "president" declared war on a country under his own definitions that up until Putin has decided to reenact them publicly this past week COULD NOT BE CALLED "war". "We" are not at "war", "we" are INVADING another country BY FORCE and propping our own puppet government in it. While you think this guy ought to work on vocabulary you should be flipping through a dictionary yourself, or an encyclopedia.

Workers not in the labor force, but who want a job?

1996 - 5.779 million
2004 - 4.705

Unemployment rate?

1996 - 5.5%
2004 - 5.6%

Of those unemployed 27 weeks or longer?

1996 - 18.8%
2004 - 18.2%

Home Ownership rate?

1996 - 65.1%
2004 - 69.2%

30-year fixed rate?

1996 - 8.25%
2004 - 6.06%

Debt % of GDP?

1996 - 48.5%
2004 - 37.5%

Americans without health insurance?

1996 - 15.6%
2004 - 15.6%

Federal Financial Aid for college (both in 2002 dollars)

1996 - 446 Billion Dollars
2004 - 716 Billion Dollars

Charitable Giving?

1996 - 150.7 Billion Dollars
2004 - 241 Billion Dollars

Now with all of these FACTS...is it any wonder why the polls are running exactly the opposite of what your spewing out of your mouth? You can claim that the people are falling off of the data chart as they have been unemployed so long, but WHALLA....there is an actual FACTUAL record of such people, and it is FACTUALLY lower than the same period when Clinton ran for RE-ELECTION. When he did it, he was a god, when we do it, well, it just isn't good enough, it is actually bad, real bad, really really bad, it is scary. Bush has done better than CLinton in all of these, and many many many more areas, I just got sick of pointing them out at this point.

Is everything perfect? NOPE! Far from it, but is everything scary or bad, bad, really bad? NOPE! Stop the drama queen candadicay and tell us what your boy Scarry Kerry is actually wanting to do. I'm sick of you guys just hooking a link to his site also. Why not show some independantly verifiable data, and not is advertising campaign machine.

Love ya mean it...
Yeah, independantly verifiable ... and linked. Unless you did all this number crunching yourself, you can't expect anyone to assume you're telling the truth and not misrepresenting or blatantly lying about the numbers involved. So where'd ya get 'em? Kettle's black, ya know.

Flucuations in the market of a small amount of points that hardly have an effect on the economy. Now say if we had a 5% rise in unemployment that would be cause to worry.
Also considering the state of the country when unemployment went up 2 massive towers were knocked down basically getting rid of over 100 thousand jobs in manhattan in dozens of industries. This in turn caused fear to spread to the stock market which thrives in times of stability and calmness. In times of chaos and uncertainty people stop playing the market and invest in bonds. Financial investing in companies stopped and then companies that were thinking of expanding or thinking about restructing there department feared other attacks and in order to consolidate there assets started laying off workers or cancelling expansion plans. Hence the reason for the rise in unemployment.
Now since the situation in the U.S. is better people are more certain in the stockmarket so investing is going up and companies are starting to hire and expand again.
The first and middle parts have their merit ... but consider.
Three f*cking years ago. One almost entire term has passed.

Well if it isn't GayMore gymoor MoreGay...

Will you and John Kerry get off Vietnam already dewd? I doubt you were born when Vietnam happened for one thing, secondly a Democrat started that fucking war and not Nixon. Every Democrat points to that war as the big defining moment for Republicans, and they fail to mention your asshole leaders are the ones who got us into it in the first palce.

The best thing Republicans could have done at that time was to let the Democrats run unopposed so they couldn't blame their stupid actions on Republicans for the rest of my damn lifetime.

What is your point anyways? You make no sense, but then again I have no expectations you will either...don't answer that...
So instead of dealing with the integrity of the person's argument, and providing clarity of thought, you instead snivelingly manipulate the name of the individual to suit some petty 2nd-grade average psycho-emotional leanings and feel good about yourself? You must be a current Republican, and if not, you're the TYPE they're looking for to hang out with and have a few beers with.
Of course, manipulate the data to suit yourself and pat yourself on the back for your accomplished wit!

The first and middle parts have their merit ... but consider.
Three f*cking years ago. One almost entire term has passed.

Three years, two entire wars, the largest government agency in our history was created, dewd, a lot of things have happened. This is not the same country it was prior to Sept. 11th, and it never will be again...sadly...

Three years, two entire wars, the largest government agency in our history was created, dewd, a lot of things have happened. This is not the same country it was prior to Sept. 11th, and it never will be again...sadly...
Two entire wars? So you imply either of them are anywhere near finished?
Even, as stupid as the motherf*cker is, EVEN Bush himself let slip once very recently and declared that he didn't think the war against terrorism could be won. A little honesty like that goes a long way, i actually was taken aback a moment of sensibility he is greatly bereft of for the most part.
I and no one else here needs anyone else to "explain" that it will never be the same again and a lot of things have happened, and that it'll be a constant struggle. The difference is the policies implemented and the peoples that benefit from said policies.
No matter what a flagwaver or burner implies or screams in digital,
attacking Iraq now for the PNAC perogative was one of the most callous and hideously irresponsible things for any president to do in this time and age. Don't tell me or anyone else here that those numbers of subsequence are as irrelevant as Cheney'd like you to think.

So instead of dealing with the integrity of the person's argument, and providing clarity of thought, you instead snivelingly manipulate the name of the individual to suit some petty 2nd-grade average psycho-emotional leanings and feel good about yourself? You must be a current Republican, and if not, you're the TYPE they're looking for to hang out with and have a few beers with.
Of course, manipulate the data to suit yourself and pat yourself on the back for your accomplished wit!

Hello Dumbass, fopr your info he and I discuss crap daily and he pretty much takes the opposite point of view. I call him a name, he calls me a name, we deal with it. Your so retarded, why am I bothering with you?

Two entire wars? So you imply either of them are anywhere near finished?
Even, as stupid as the motherf*cker is, EVEN Bush himself let slip once very recently and declared that he didn't think the war against terrorism could be won. A little honesty like that goes a long way, i actually was taken aback a moment of sensibility he is greatly bereft of for the most part.
I and no one else here needs anyone else to "explain" that it will never be the same again and a lot of things have happened, and that it'll be a constant struggle. The difference is the policies implemented and the peoples that benefit from said policies.
No matter what a flagwaver or burner implies or screams in digital,
attacking Iraq now for the PNAC perogative was one of the most callous and hideously irresponsible things for any president to do in this time and age. Don't tell me or anyone else here that those numbers of subsequence are as irrelevant as Cheney'd like you to think.

Your irrelivant, and in dire need of a pacifier...I hope you get to liking G. W. as your stuck with him for another 4 years turd breath...yuck yuck yuck

Three years, two entire wars, the largest government agency in our history was created, dewd, a lot of things have happened. This is not the same country it was prior to Sept. 11th, and it never will be again...sadly...

That's what was said about Pearl Harbor, but we bounced back. This was said too when the English burned down the Whitehouse in the War of 1812. There will be a new generation that never saw the towers fall. 9/11 may change how we gather intelligence, and hopefully it will change how we go about dealing with the rest of the world, but it should NOT change what it is to be American. It should not tarnish American ideals. We should not go about our business with the fear and distrust 9/11 thrust upon us. We cannot be afraid, and we cannot see the world as a more evil place, or, and I realize the triteness of the phrase, the terrorists have surely won. And in a way, they have won, since they got us to attack a country that had nothing to do with 9/11.

The thing is, and this is what really gets me angry about the Bush administration, is they keep plugging into our minds how they are going to make us more safe, while at the same time, telling us how in danger we are. The go on to say that we won't be safe if anyone else is in power.

They tell us they want to fight "the terrorists" but then they start a war in Iraq that has only inflamed the entire region against us. Meanwhile, Al Qaeda is regrouping and is recruiting more militants than ever.

They form a Homeland Security department, but drag their heels when it comes to securing ports and increasing police manpower.

They fight the creation of the 9/11 commission, whose intent was to see what mistakes from 9/11 can be corrected.

They tell us the tax rebates are because we have a surplus. Then they say it's to goose the economy. Then they repeat, and say it will goose the economy. Then they repeat it again. Guess what? It looks like the economy is heading down again, or, as Greenspan says, "we've hit a soft patch."

With Enron, we have the biggest case of Corporate fraud ever, involving a good friend of the President's, and yet the Vice President keeps his energy taskforce, most likely consisting of several members of Enron and Halliburton, secret.

They continue to keep the portions of the 9/11 report that deal with the Saudis (close friends of Bush, and, to a lesser extent, all of America's Presidents,) a secret. More and more comes out about possible Saudi funding for Al Qaeda, and it cannot be argued that the gross majority of 9/11 hijackers were Saudi Arabian.

NONE of this makes sense to support. None of it!

:headbang: I don't understand why so many of you can't see this. It makes me more frightened than any terrorist attack ever could. I see a breakdown of our national common sense due to an overabundance of fear and nationalism, and it makes me want to scream.

Another 4 years of Bush, and the terrorists HAVE won. They are no more or less likely to attack us, the damage will be internal.

Your irrelivant, and in dire need of a pacifier...I hope you get to liking G. W. as your stuck with him for another 4 years turd breath...yuck yuck yuck

Shakespeare couldn't have said it better [/sarcasm]

Good Questions, and I'd like to respond in my biased way. I'll be open and candid, but of course we will disagree on most point regardless.

1. We are not fighting Japan or Germany or England. We are fighting an ideology in this war. There is no national country of origin to attack, it is a pervasive religion that is propped up by certain governments and cultures. To not go after this would mean sitting around and be hit over and over until the shear mass of attacks destroys faith and confidence in our government, markets and people. We didn't get hit just on 911, we have been getting hit for the last 15 years all over the globe. 911 just woke up the country to say "Hey, these fuckers are never going to stop, and they are getting REALLY crazy now, how much of this can we take?" Well, no country can take to many 911's and survive. We HAD to act, and push terrorism away from our shores.

2. Enron - Did Enron start when the Republicans took office? If I recall hundreds of businesses pulled the exact same type of accounting games all during the entire 90's. Everyone was pilfering the law and the books. This is just pure politics. Democrats knew this was bad medicine, even Terry McCalliff made his Global Crossing investment turn into huge sums of money overnight, and he laughed afterwords becuase everyone was doing it. Bush did the wise thing, which was to fix it, take the heat and move on. What was the newly elected president going to do, say "Clinton sure left me a fucking mess." You can blame Bush all you want, but this is obvious blindness by liberals, the guy was not even in office when all of this took place. He was in office to fix the problem after the crash.

3. REgarding Saudi Arabia...national interest. Why do you think all of the PResidents are chums with these guys? Do you think they all love golf and it is the common bond? Hell no, the reality is they have us by the damn balls and have been squeezing for years and there isn't a damn thing we can do about it. What would be gained by pissing off the Saudi's? I don't care if they sanctioned the damn bombings directly, we are a fuel economy and that is how the world works. What if they controlled all the water on the planet and pissed us off. Would you w3ant to jeapordize your source of water? It is the same thing in essense...

You have asked and made some of the best points I have seen in this thread today, good job!

P.s. that doesn't mean Kerry would be a bad president or wouldn't do a good job, I have no idea as he won't help me figure that out so far, but I know I can't risk gambling on these issues right now.

The fact remains, than rather than just bombing the hell out of countries and creating more and more militants who hate western civilisation.

Shouldn't we be looking at the reason they hate us so much in the first place?

Good Questions, and I'd like to respond in my biased way. I'll be open and candid, but of course we will disagree on most point regardless.
Thank you, and likewise thanks for your thoughtful reply.

1. We are not fighting Japan or Germany or England. We are fighting an ideology in this war. There is no national country of origin to attack, it is a pervasive religion that is propped up by certain governments and cultures. To not go after this would mean sitting around and be hit over and over until the shear mass of attacks destroys faith and confidence in our government, markets and people. We didn't get hit just on 911, we have been getting hit for the last 15 years all over the globe. 911 just woke up the country to say "Hey, these fuckers are never going to stop, and they are getting REALLY crazy now, how much of this can we take?" Well, no country can take to many 911's and survive. We HAD to act, and push terrorism away from our shores.

You are right that we are not fighting a political power that has a set territory, and it's true that we have suffered attacks from them, but the timeframe is a lot longer that 15 years. You have to step back and ask why they want to attack us so violently. While, to a certain extent, their distrust and hatred of us are fueled by social and ideological differences, the main reason is because America, driven by a need for resources, has interfered for too long and too tenaciously in their affairs. We are an ocean away, and if we were out of sight, we'd be out of mind. American diplomacy in the Middle East has been heavy handed and unbalanced for decades, The unfortunate thing is, that I think the current administration is the culmination of our mistakes. The gung ho attitude, and the anger that we have flung back into the area has poured, appropriately enough, more gasoline on their fire of hatred, to the point that we may be at the brink of all-out war with the entire Middle East.

2. Enron - Did Enron start when the Republicans took office? If I recall hundreds of businesses pulled the exact same type of accounting games all during the entire 90's. Everyone was pilfering the law and the books. This is just pure politics. Democrats knew this was bad medicine, even Terry McCalliff made his Global Crossing investment turn into huge sums of money overnight, and he laughed afterwords becuase everyone was doing it. Bush did the wise thing, which was to fix it, take the heat and move on. What was the newly elected president going to do, say "Clinton sure left me a fucking mess." You can blame Bush all you want, but this is obvious blindness by liberals, the guy was not even in office when all of this took place. He was in office to fix the problem after the crash.

Again, our government, Republican or Democrat, has too long a history of allowing corporations perogatives not allowed to the common citizen, and again I see the current administration as the most extreme example of such behavior. I had a talk with a utility worker who had a lot to say about how bad deregulation has been for people. Normal market pressures don't work when it comes to necessities, since most people cannot just decide not to use electricity if the price isn't right. Also, no former president has been so closely entangled with the energy interests. I blame all politicians, but I see Bush as the proverbial straw that broke the camel's back because of his policy of corporate protectionism. The moguls were made more brave in their corruption by having a good friend as President

3. Regarding Saudi Arabia...national interest. Why do you think all of the Presidents are chums with these guys? Do you think they all love golf and it is the common bond? Hell no, the reality is they have us by the damn balls and have been squeezing for years and there isn't a damn thing we can do about it. What would be gained by pissing off the Saudi's? I don't care if they sanctioned the damn bombings directly, we are a fuel economy and that is how the world works. What if they controlled all the water on the planet and pissed us off. Would you want to jeapordize your source of water? It is the same thing in essense...

Yes, the Saudi's have had us by the balls for a long time, which is part of the reason for our Iraqi War. Because of the insurgency in Iraq, that source of oil is not available to us, and perhaps Saudi Arabia has never had it's hands so tightly clenched around our testicles as they do now. Again, this has been a long-term failure in our government, but never so glaring as it is now. I do not see Bus has someone who could even begin to extricate our nuts out of the Saudi grip.

You have asked and made some of the best points I have seen in this thread today, good job!

P.s. that doesn't mean Kerry would be a bad president or wouldn't do a good job, I have no idea as he won't help me figure that out so far, but I know I can't risk gambling on these issues right now.

Thanks again. Glad to see the both of us are debating like civilized gentlemen. I only ask that you keep your mind open during the debates between Bush and Kerry.

The fact remains, than rather than just bombing the hell out of countries and creating more and more militants who hate western civilisation.

Shouldn't we be looking at the reason they hate us so much in the first place?

No, what is the point. I won't point out the obvious (liberal).

Look, many people have this notion that you can rationalize with everyone or that we must look and see what We did to cuase them to do this to us. But this is just illogical on your part. I'm not saying your intentions are not good. Your asking the natural question, we all wish it were that easy and we could just change something we did, or make ammends or something. That just doesn't work with Fundamentalism though.

Think of it this way, in the old days when they used to dunk witches in Salem. Would it have mattered if the lady said she was not a witch? Hell no, they dunked them until they died. If they sank, they were a witch, if they floated, they were not a with...either way they got dunked.

Fundamental Islam is much the same way, except they are not looking for witches, they are looking for anyone and everyone who refuses to accept their way of thinking. They began decades ago killing and destroying those unbelievers in their own countries. That is all but accomplished, and now they can spread and branch out.

I mentioned on this post before that my wife was arabic, I didn't mention however that she was a Chritian from Lebanon. They were all forced out or killed in the 70's and early 80's. Now that same ideology is secure there and all over the middle east and wanting to burst out and spread elsewhere.

The obvious is that they hate America more than life itself. We have no choice but to fight it, or be ran over by it.

The fact remains, than rather than just bombing the hell out of countries and creating more and more militants who hate western civilisation.

Shouldn't we be looking at the reason they hate us so much in the first place?

Thats one of the most intelligent statements so far.
Hatred to the US isnt limited to a few small countries, it is spread all over the world, if the US was to bomb every country that disagreed with them they would be there for years, why not find out what caused the hatred and attack it at its core, emotion and beleif, rather than trying to wipe out all "non-beleivers" in the american culture

[QUOTE=Gymoor]Thank you, and likewise thanks for your thoughtful reply.

I'll promise to play nice, I've come to grow fond of you grasshopper lol

Regarding your thoughts on our policies and such. You have to consider this. Many younger Americans fail to look at a larger context of Arab attacks.

They are whoopin Russia over Chechnia

Indonesia already became taken over

Much of China is already taken over

India is under seige daily, and has had several attempts to kill their leadership

Spain was hit

England is heavy saturated already and are very concerned.

France is in deep doo doo as they were complicite with these guys and now they are having to face reality that that doesn't protect them, they have citizens being kidnapped and threatened with death, and they defended these guys more than anyone.

You can't change policy to win them over, and you can't say sorry for anything to win them over. Either you start wearing a towel on your head and praying to Mecca on your knees five times a day and mean it or your going to have your head cut off. Like I said, fundamentalism, that means there is nothing you can do to barter with them or negotiate, either they convert you, kill you or you kill them. The fact of the matter is, many of their own people hate it, but live in deathly fear to do anything aboutit. We can't let ourselves become that way can we?

Think of it this way, in the old days when they used to dunk witches in Salem. Would it have mattered if the lady said she was not a witch? Hell no, they dunked them until they died. If they sank, they were a witch, if they floated, they were not a with...either way they got dunked.

Ah, but did the people of Salem go out hunting in other States for witches? No, they burned witches in their own backyard. In order to make someone pissed off enough to cross an ocean to hurt you, you have to really piss them off.

Probably Americans wandering around in the Middle East will always be in some danger, as long as Fundamentalism still holds sway. If we were not so prominent in meddling with their governments, their trade, and their way of life (trying to impose democracy, at the point of a sword, on a country that never asked for it, for example,) they'd only attack and kill in their immediate area.

Ah, but did the people of Salem go out hunting in other States for witches? No, they burned witches in their own backyard. In order to make someone pissed off enough to cross an ocean to hurt you, you have to really piss them off.

Probably Americans wandering around in the Middle East will always be in some danger, as long as Fundamentalism still holds sway. If we were not so prominent in meddling with their governments, their trade, and their way of life (trying to impose democracy, at the point of a sword, on a country that never asked for it, for example,) they'd only attack and kill in their immediate area.

They do not care where you live. They want to entire planet, the whole globe! This is not about us leaving them alone, they have spent years going around the globe to infiltrate and influence colleges, governments, factories. This is new for us today, but the reality is they have been working on it for over 30 years.

They already have their own countries, what was America doing to Afghanistan? We even helped them keep it from the Russians...they sure gave us a nice thank you present.

Unless your a fundamentalist Muslim, your as much a target as myself or George Bush. Your not exempt or special, they could care two craps about you. They would even pay good money for your head, especially a young kid. The media would love that!

You can't change policy to win them over, and you can't say sorry for anything to win them over. Either you start wearing a towel on your head and praying to Mecca on your knees five times a day and mean it or your going to have your head cut off. Like I said, fundamentalism, that means there is nothing you can do to barter with them or negotiate, either they convert you, kill you or you kill them. The fact of the matter is, many of their own people hate it, but live in deathly fear to do anything aboutit. We can't let ourselves become that way can we?

Look, Nazis, for example, were some of the most frothy-mouthed, genocidal, religion-drunk menaces the world has ever seen. They went away (mostly) didn't they?

The Puritans of the Salem Witch Trials went away eventually too, and they were as Fundamentalist as they come.

EVERY society in the world has gone through brutal, fundamentalist periods. They all went away, eventually.

We need to protect our borders, head off any hints of serious attacks, and stop poking sticks into hornets nests. We need to slowly but surely extricate ourselves from the Middle East. There's only one way to do that, and that is to free ourselves from the teat of the Arabian oil.

I think that is the number 1 priority of the next 20 years, or at least it should be.

Look, Nazis, for example, were some of the most frothy-mouthed, genocidal, religion-drunk menaces the world has ever seen. They went away (mostly) didn't they?

The Puritans of the Salem Witch Trials went away eventually too, and they were as Fundamentalist as they come.

EVERY society in the world has gone through brutal, fundamentalist periods. They all went away, eventually.

We need to protect our borders, head off any hints of serious attacks, and stop poking sticks into hornets nests. We need to slowly but surely extricate ourselves from the Middle East. There's only one way to do that, and that is to free ourselves from the teat of the Arabian oil.

I think that is the number 1 priority of the next 20 years, or at least it should be.


I 100% agree with you there!!!

That is the number one goal and mission, get of the oil dependancy. Hell, I wish we subsidized the crap out of alternative fuels and vehicles.

There is a huge difference from these guys and all others before though. Hitler wanted power, expansion, growth, he was like an American in that sense, Russia as well, they wanted to expand thier influence. These guys are not like that at all. They want your sould for Allah...

They could give a crap about your soil, your goods, your economy...they want to remove anyone who is not likethinking from the planet. Hitler didn't kill every Frenchman he came across or anyone other than the Jews, he even kept plenty of them around for cheap labor.

Muslim fundamentalists don't want you around at all. They want their allah hommies around, but everyone else must be exterminated. That is a huge distinction...what the hell can you do with these guys other than kill them, and in the process hope many of them come to their senses. History shows that everytime we let some go, almost all end up taking up arms against us again.

Even Christians get converted to atheism faster than these guys can forgo islam lol

They do not care where you live. They want to entire planet, the whole globe! This is not about us leaving them alone, they have spent years going around the globe to infiltrate and influence colleges, governments, factories. This is new for us today, but the reality is they have been working on it for over 30 years.

They already have their own countries, what was America doing to Afghanistan? We even helped them keep it from the Russians...they sure gave us a nice thank you present.

Unless your a fundamentalist Muslim, your as much a target as myself or George Bush. Your not exempt or special, they could care two craps about you. They would even pay good money for your head, especially a young kid. The media would love that!

If we weren't there, constantly poking our necks into their affairs, they'd be more interested is mere survival that hunting down non believers. You are making them out to be unhuman, which is a mistake. They are human, with the same wants and needs as the next person. If we weren't a constant presence, they might continue to hate us, but they certainly would have more imprtant things to do than hunting us down. We make ourselves special targets, especially after the Iraq war started.

Most of the rational discussion tried with the fanatics has been, do it our way or die, or if its been on a nice day then sanctions have been put on the countries.
In iraq, the UN ended killing almost as many people as Saddam Hussain because due to sanctions the populous couldnt get access to medical supplys.
Maybe if the world started spending the money on education and making sure the fanatics have enough to eat and drink, they would live happier lives instead of the hate-breeding starvation and ill health that they are subjected to

If we weren't there, constantly poking our necks into their affairs, they'd be more interested is mere survival that hunting down non believers. You are making them out to be unhuman, which is a mistake. They are human, with the same wants and needs as the next person. If we weren't a constant presence, they might continue to hate us, but they certainly would have more imprtant things to do than hunting us down. We make ourselves special targets, especially after the Iraq war started.

4 embassy bombings, USS Cole, World Trade Center twice, Americans captured and killed all over the globe including Indonesia, Tunesia, Iran, Moroco, and over a dozen other countries, German disco bombing to kill americans, Rhyad, Kobar Towers, I could go on and on.

What is very disturbing to me is that the American media refuses to blow this up into one big picture. They almost certainly try to point to each incident as an isolated case. If you took every incursion since the Olympic killings of the 70's your head would spin with reality and you would truelly have a wakeup call.

I think this is what must happen for Americans to grasp the totality of this fight. Imagine if all of this was being commited by Mexico on our southern borders. If the last 30 years we could all see where they hit us over and over in various small towns and cities. It would be a takeover of thier country.

The problem we have is we are not used to responding to attacks against us that take place around the globe. Are we to flee all of these places just becuase we are Americans and never return? We could never travel to another country again if that were the case, and they would still hit us, just at home everytime.

Most of the rational discussion tried with the fanatics has been, do it our way or die, or if its been on a nice day then sanctions have been put on the countries.
In iraq, the UN ended killing almost as many people as Saddam Hussain because due to sanctions the populous couldnt get access to medical supplys.
Maybe if the world started spending the money on education and making sure the fanatics have enough to eat and drink, they would live happier lives instead of the hate-breeding starvation and ill health that they are subjected to

For example, after WWI, the Germans were held down by sanctions, their economy was so ruined and the rest of Europe was so interested in punishing them, that it lead almost directly to the desperation that gave rise to Hitler and Nazism. If we had held to the same pattern after WWII, we never would have stamped out the Nazis.

If we try the WWI model in the Middle East, we will merely fan the flames of Fundamentalism.

Suffering breeds hate.
If someone says to you, "since you arent doing what I want you to I am going to starve you."
your initial reaction isnt, "damn, thats a nice person, i wanna get to know him"
You would most likely want to blow up their buildings, kill their troops and demoralize their people.
This is the attitude that the world (not just USA, but every country) has been taking with the middle east, so I dont blame them for being bitter about our treatment of them, and also of the predominantly comfortable lives that we live, not watching people dieing in the streets as there is no room in hospitals and not having to worry where our next meal is coming from because everything in your country is controlled and limited by other countries so that only the wealthy can afford lifes necessities

4 embassy bombings, USS Cole, World Trade Center twice, Americans captured and killed all over the globe including Indonesia, Tunesia, Iran, Moroco, and over a dozen other countries, German disco bombing to kill americans, Rhyad, Kobar Towers, I could go on and on.

What is very disturbing to me is that the American media refuses to blow this up into one big picture. They almost certainly try to point to each incident as an isolated case. If you took every incursion since the Olympic killings of the 70's your head would spin with reality and you would truelly have a wakeup call.

I think this is what must happen for Americans to grasp the totality of this fight. Imagine if all of this was being commited by Mexico on our southern borders. If the last 30 years we could all see where they hit us over and over in various small towns and cities. It would be a takeover of thier country.

The problem we have is we are not used to responding to attacks against us that take place around the globe. Are we to flee all of these places just becuase we are Americans and never return? We could never travel to another country again if that were the case, and they would still hit us, just at home everytime.

And yet the number of people killed in terrorist attacks is a tiny fraction compared to how many have died in automobile accidents in the same time frame, but I don't see you suggesting the stamping out of cars. I digress.

Another problem is that the terrorist are not "a big picture" They are not one enemy. They are disjointed cells of not necessarily allied groups who all have reasons to hate us. I'm not saying that we are the only ones to blame, but we must shoulder some of it. There's no way the world will tolerate us commiting genocide in the middle east, so the only recourse is to undercut their hate. We have to hold ourselves to a higher standard, and we have to make an honest attempt to build their education systems. Education makes blind hate and irrational fear much more difficult, and it's a lot cheaper than war.

And yet the number of people killed in terrorist attacks is a tiny fraction compared to how many have died in automobile accidents in the same time frame, but I don't see you suggesting the stamping out of cars. I digress.

Another problem is that the terrorist are not "a big picture" They are not one enemy. They are disjointed cells of not necessarily allied groups who all have reasons to hate us. I'm not saying that we are the only ones to blame, but we must shoulder some of it. There's no way the world will tolerate us commiting genocide in the middle east, so the only recourse is to undercut their hate. We have to hold ourselves to a higher standard, and we have to make an honest attempt to build their education systems. Education makes blind hate and irrational fear much more difficult, and it's a lot cheaper than war.

Ug...dewd...you peeps will never learn. Did educating them change the results in Vietnam?

When an axe murder comes to your house do tell them, "wait, your not educated, come have a seat."

oh well yeah you guys may be right. YOU FOUND A FLAW. but look at what else you have other than bush. KERRY. look at what they found out. about him. HE'S a lyin man. All the things he promised they found that not all can be done with the mony that the USA has. It is just impossable. I don't know about you but one flaw that happend is better then lookin at all the ones that are could be to come. As they say "you learn from your mistakes"


Ditto for Bush. His campaign promises are impossible and incompatible with his promise to cut the deficit. He has not proposed how he is gonna pay for his programs, probably because he has no intention of omplimenting them, just like in 2000.

Ug...dewd...you peeps will never learn. Did educating them change the results in Vietnam?

When an axe murder comes to your house do tell them, "wait, your not educated, come have a seat."

No, but education, security and a decent place to live makes it less likely that they'll become an axe murderer in the first place.

See my quote above about how the harsh treatment of the Germans after WWI only lead to disaster.

kerry's lie is more than a few months off in cambodia...his lie is calling this bush's war when in 2002 he stood before the senate ( and i watche dthis personally) and rallied for this war..."we know saddam has weapons..we know he has used them in the past and if we do not stop him we know he will use them again....then later kerry calls bush's intel faulty and erroneous..hmmm..who sat on the senate intell committee...hmmm oh yeah kerry...oh except for the 75% of the time when he just didn't show up....oooh i'm a war hero..or wait wasn't it I am a war criminal..hmmm
not too mention he has refused press interviews for the past month ..what else is he hiding... oh but his wife speaks french great ...that'l come in handy when he's kissing their hindquarters

check out...http://www.faithfreedom.org/

I believe the last time I looked that the unemployment rate is about 5% (?). If you consider that a good portion of those unemployed WANT to be unemployed and remain that way in order to sap the government, then the percentage really is lower than that.

Ahh the good ol' conservative game of 'Blame the Victim!"
Yep, those lazy bums just don't want to work.
And those 34.6m Americans classified as living below the poverty line (including 6.8m who have jobs), why they just like going hungry. There's plenty of people who wish they could get through the day living on what they do. Think of the weight you'd lose!
And that women over there wearing the short dress, why she wants to be sexually assualted.
And that Black guy, hey he really enjoys being discriminated against!
:rolleyes:

I don't know about you but one flaw that happend is better then lookin at all the ones that are could be to come. As they say "you learn from your mistakes"
Righhttt... So Bush has screwed up American over the last four years, but let's give him another chance. I'm sure he's learnt from his mistakes by now and won't screw up again. :rolleyes:
Now why doesn't the Bush campaign use that as their slogan?
"OK we admit it: We screwed up, but give us another four years and we'll work out what we did wrong!"

Just to support your point. I spent 8 years in Special Ops USMC, and during the first Gulf war, my contract expired....some 9 months later I got to go home, after being there a total of 14 months. I didn't cry about it. I did what everyone in my unit always did, I went to bed every night and "Prayed for war."
You "prayed" for war? Why would you pray for war?
And before you even think of crying about my language, consider this. This is reality, life and what you can expect when people are trying to blow your nuts off so they can use them for an ashtray.
Then why are you whinning if you "prayed for war"?
Lead follow or get the hell out of the way...your slowing down the wheels of progress and we have towelheads to kill...
So you really don't believe in "liberating" the Iraqi people, and it is a matter of "progress" and killing "towelheads"? :eek:

the economy is damn good where I am. I don't know anyone that does not have a job that wants one. most of the time it is a pride issue, and people are not willing to work at a certain job because they feel it is below them. well guess what? get over it! this is the real world! sometimes you have to do things that you don't want to do! tough! what are you gonna do go cry to mommy?

Actually the economy is doing rather well considering we are at war. I know that when I look in the newspaper, there are plenty of jobs. Sure, a lot of them are crappy, but you do what you must for as long as you must until something else comes along. If I can take three buses and walk a half a mile to work in the freezing cold, doing work that I hate for about three years, so can some other lazy ass.

Bad economy -- BAH!

Okay, so you have to get three buses and walk half a mile to work in a job you hate, and you think this is a good state of affairs? You know, you're right! If only everybody thought like you, the elite could forget about resentment forever and just live off the underclass in comfort and security, safe in the knowledge that the commoners are pleased and proud to have miserable lives. It'll be almost as good as mediaeval Russia!

I believe the last time I looked that the unemployment rate is about 5% (?). If you consider that a good portion of those unemployed WANT to be unemployed and remain that way in order to sap the government, then the percentage really is lower than that.

Actually, I do believe that the unemployment rate includes only those who are actively looking for work. Once somebody gives up on finding a job, he or she is no longer considered "unemployed" -- that is, part of the labor pool -- and are not part of those numbers.

I am trying to find some confirmation of this but am not having much luck now. I will edit this post when I find confirmation from a source I can trust.

Look, all this debating is not going to matter unless you guys get out and vote against George W. Bush in November's election. Get out, register to vote, and toss this fool out of office!

Persons unemployed for any significant length of time are no longer counted as unemployed. The actual employment level, as considered on the basis of working age people who aren't institutionalized, was 62.7% for August of this year, down slightly from the summer's high of 63.0%, and far down from 2000 August levels (64.5%). The unemployment rate - a highly derived figure, but useful for short term outlook - was 5.4% by the standard measurement techniques - improved from last year, of course, but high by the standards Clinton set.

TR, I don't know where you are, but I have serious doubts that you get out much if everybody you know that wants a job has one.

You know what. I have no problem doing that, but everytime I ask for a link I get one to John Kerry's capaign website and told to look it up myself...well, I can say the same thing. I know I am not going to win over any converts here, I just like watching liberals confirm to me they have no clue what they are talking about. Maybe that's why they can't win an election in this country anymore

I hope you realize that makes you look really ignorant, by 1) refusing to make your info more accessable when you say you have no problem with it, and 2) going on and on stereotyping others. Even if everyone else didn't provide the sources of their posted statistics, you would look more credible by doing so. Not everything is black and white, not everything is conservative vs liberal. Look at Bush, he's not even considered a conservative, by classical conservatives. Of course part of the reason is to change his actual stance and call it what you want to offend the least amount of people possible to get the most votes, but it's not the only reason.

Anyway, if you want, you're welcome to check a thread and article in the conservative section of politicsforum.org.
http://www.politicsforum.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=26790

Here's another thread that talks about evangelicals and their growing influence on conservatives. Another interesting read.
http://www.politicsforum.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=30513

Your irrelivant, and in dire need of a pacifier...I hope you get to liking G. W. as your stuck with him for another 4 years turd breath...yuck yuck yuck


Hello Dumbass, fopr your info he and I discuss crap daily and he pretty much takes the opposite point of view. I call him a name, he calls me a name, we deal with it. Your so retarded, why am I bothering with you?


You've had what, 2 official warnings now? You don't seem to get it. Any more flaming from you, and you're gone. Forumbanned for a length of time left to my discretion. Do I make myself absolutely clear?


http://www.satanstephen.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/EyeOfMyrth.jpg
Myrth
The Eye of Myrth is upon thee
Forum Moderator

Wanna know why people support Kerry and hate Bush, because people are stupid, tHey will believe anything because they fear it to be true or want it to be true, 'nuff said.
steve-dave

Your irrelivant, and in dire need of a pacifier...I hope you get to liking G. W. as your stuck with him for another 4 years turd breath...yuck yuck yuck

You insufferable red neck. You've actually sunk down to calling people names. What are you 4? Bush is not good for our country.

But I will say, I feel that Bush has said so much bullshit to get you and the rest of your red neck society, Florida also, to vote for him.

Wanna know why people support Kerry and hate Bush, because people are stupid, tHey will believe anything because they fear it to be true or want it to be true, 'nuff said.
steve-dave

:rolleyes:

The first and middle parts have their merit ... but consider.
Three f*cking years ago. One almost entire term has passed.


Look at it this way its like knocking over a coke machine you cant do it one push. You got to rock it first and some rocks are better then others.

Like capturing Saddam the stock market jumped up alot after that.

Actually, I do believe that the unemployment rate includes only those who are actively looking for work. Once somebody gives up on finding a job, he or she is no longer considered "unemployed" -- that is, part of the labor pool -- and are not part of those numbers.

I am trying to find some confirmation of this but am not having much luck now. I will edit this post when I find confirmation from a source I can trust.


Actually the unemployment rate is those claiming unemployment benefits or those sign up for a government run workforce center.....they don't measure welfare, those who are still looking but don't qualify for or have run out of benefits or those who are waiting for benefits to start (which can take several months) and those who are not looking at all.

Example: My husband is unemployed but is NOT counted because he did not qualify for unemployment and he is looking for a job with out a car so cannot get to the nearest workforce center which is 30 miles away.

You can get this information from reporting agencies or workforce reps... For those that do not know there are no unemployment reps, it is run by automated phone...and if you do talk to a person they direct you back to the phone system.

Actually, I do believe that the unemployment rate includes only those who are actively looking for work. Once somebody gives up on finding a job, he or she is no longer considered "unemployed" -- that is, part of the labor pool -- and are not part of those numbers.

I am trying to find some confirmation of this but am not having much luck now. I will edit this post when I find confirmation from a source I can trust.
The best site to find out the different definitions of employed, unemployed and who are not in the work force is at the Bureau of Labor Statistics:

http://www.bls.gov/cps/cps_htgm.htm

For example:

Who is counted as employed?

For example, people are considered employed if they did any work at all for pay or profit during the survey week. This includes all part-time and temporary work, as well as regular full-time year-round employment.

But what about the two following cases? George Lewis is 16 years old, and he has no job from which he receives any pay or profit. However, George does help with the regular chores around his father's farm about 20 hours each week.

Lisa Fox spends most of her time taking care of her home and children, but, all day Friday and Saturday, she helps in her husband's computer software store.

Under the Government's definition of employment, both George and Lisa are considered employed. They fall into a group called "unpaid family workers," which includes any person who worked 15 hours or more in a week without pay in a family-operated enterprise. Such persons contribute significantly to our productive effort and are an important part of our labor supply, particularly in agriculture and retail trade. However, unpaid family workers who work fewer than 15 hours per week are counted as "not in the labor force."

Who is counted as unemployed?

Persons are classified as unemployed if they do not have a job, have actively looked for work in the prior 4 weeks, and are currently available for work.

Who is not in the labor force?

A series of questions is asked each month of persons not in the labor force to obtain information about their desire for work, the reasons why they had not looked for work in the last 4 weeks, their prior job search, and their availability for work. These questions include: 1. Do you currently want a job, either full or part time? 2. What is the main reason you were not looking for work during the LAST 4 WEEKS? 3. Did you look for work at any time during the last 12 months? 4. LAST WEEK, could you have started a job if one had been offered?

These questions form the basis for estimating the number of persons who are not in the labor force but who are considered to be "marginally attached" to it. These are persons without jobs who are not currently looking for work (and therefore not counted as unemployed), but who nevertheless have demonstrated some degree of labor force attachment. Specifically, to be counted as "marginally attached," individuals must indicate that they currently want a job, have looked for work in the last 12 months (or since they last worked if they worked within the last 12 months), and are available for work. "Discouraged workers" are a subset of the marginally attached. "Discouraged workers" report they are not currently looking for work for at least one of 4 reasons: 1) they believe no job is available to them in their line of work or area, 2) they had previously been unable to find work, 3) they lack the necessary schooling, training, skills or experience, or 4) employers think they are too young or too old, or they face some other type of discrimination.

Hopefully this will help you. To access August's unemployment statistics check out this link:

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm

Please note that the above was a condensed version of what is offered on that web site.

The fact remains, than rather than just bombing the hell out of countries and creating more and more militants who hate western civilisation.

Shouldn't we be looking at the reason they hate us so much in the first place?

Actually, we shouldn't. Why should we take responsibility for such a demented and self gratifing act of murder. REGARDLESS the reason, if you take issue with anyone, Taliban, Saddam, Kim Jung II, Bush, whoever, you take it to them, and their forces. We took many measures to insure we did our best to exclude non militants in our attacks, as adults we all realize that some civilian lives will be lost, and that is truly a horrible thing, it is however a part of the cost in any war, battle, skirmish, etc. On these facts I beleive we can all probably agree. So back to the beginning, can we say that these militants who hate western civilization tried to avoid civillian casualties. No we can not, in fact their choice of the WTC was a civillian target, purposfully chosen to demoralize, frighten, and ultimately kill as many Americans (infidels) as possible, regardless of their politics. I know many may say, what does this have to do with Saddam, or anyone else, or,but why did they attack us?
If these are the questions, perhaps we are missing the point. Firstly and justly, our government has an obligation to us, the public, to defend and protect us...if they didn't we'd all be pointing fingers. That is why the war on terror began. Now, is it a confusing and difficult war, will it ever be won, completely? Not unless we remove every tyranical leader or government that is either directly or indirectly participating in terror through the actual fighting and planing to the funding, harboring, or in any way supporting such actions. In that endeavor some decisons may have to be made, not based on perfect intellegnce, not based on public opinion, but rather based on prudent, timely, and decisive action. I personally beleive that this is what has happend. Surely their could have been some misleading or innacurate statements, this could just as easily have been due to poor information and the desire to act quickly to show proper resolve, just as it could have been flat out lies. Secondly in preserving our way of life, we are in an economy driven by fossile fuels and quick transportaion, all of us in one way or another enjoy the benifits of shipping (land and air) and basic transportation (land and air). In fact our society is not only "Hooked" on it, but our country would cease to function without these basic needs, thus creating a HUGE problem for national security with the weakening of our civillian, not to mention millitary cores. Fossile fuel is quite litterally the "blood" that keeps our arteries of transportation alive.With this said two points must be made. One, although we do have some reserves, our country is somewhat at odds over "tapping" this vital resource. Thus we must, in order to protect our country, protect our supply, wherever that may be. Second, bailing out the airlines, was at that time probably the only thing to be done. After 911 we were not dealing with just a couple of airlines who were having trouble, (although some did have before 911) but instead we were dealing with the kind of major decline in passengers that could threaten even a realatively healthy company. Don't get me wrong, today if Delta or anyother goes belly up, another airline will undoubtedly be there to pick up the flights, thats just "evolution".
It is in our intrests in so many ways, to not only take this fight to those who directly had a hand in 911 and the other attacks against us leading to it, but to look at a countrys potential for terror based on their track record, ie. have they used terror against their own people? Hopefully all of this has renewed our spirit and resolve, it would be so humane and decent of us to look to others, no matter what country they live in, and proclaim with a loud voice and beating heart that, "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness." These basic American beleifs are not only ours, but belong to all. As we accept this, our capability to help, must also be accepted. While we are in an accepting role, consider, we were attacked (and other nations have been for decades) not because of what we beleive, our economy, or our involvement in other countrys with or without the UN. We were attacked because EVIL does exist, perhaps not in the demonic sence, but undoubtedly in the human condition. With no regard for Life, Liberty, or the pursuit of Happiness. These leaders/governments will not change their ways and play nice just because we ask, or because we bribe them. Change will only come about when force is applied to their breaking point, whatever that may be. Unfortunate, for sure, what would be even worse would be if we gave in, our right or ablity to act, and lost our way of life, and the gift we could have offered to others.

Rob

Most of the rational discussion tried with the fanatics has been, do it our way or die, or if its been on a nice day then sanctions have been put on the countries.
In iraq, the UN ended killing almost as many people as Saddam Hussain because due to sanctions the populous couldnt get access to medical supplys.
Maybe if the world started spending the money on education and making sure the fanatics have enough to eat and drink, they would live happier lives instead of the hate-breeding starvation and ill health that they are subjected to

Ok, education is a good thing, but I have to state that if we try to ply people(the fanatics) with food and drink, or whatever else we try to appease them with we have already lost everything. We will have conceded to terrorism.
Although the UN didn't do much good with anything they tried (it didn't have any real consequences for those in power, only the citizens, and we know he wasn't particularly concerned with their well being) although the citizens did bear the brunt of the sanctions, the UN didn't kill those people. Saddam did,
he defied the UN and kept the sanctions against his country by doing so, the blame rests on his shoulders.....The idea that the UN is to blame would be akin to holding a judge responsible for the actions that brought a defendant to his court room. Although it is the intellectual, and even emotional thing to do, we can not rationalize the UN or USA into a position of blame. The UN and the USA have tried to help, although some may disagree, but that still does not change the position of blame, Saddam was the reason his people suffered, hopefully he will face justice very soon. We can not reason "right" away only because some of us feel guilty for our fortunate situation in this country, instead lets keep the "right" and do something about the "wrong".

Rob

Actually, there is some new jobs.

Remember, when he made the promise to stimulate the economy no one could have envisioned the attack on the WTC and pentagon. So the original argument in the topic is flawed.

Secondly, the economy isn't at its worst. Its in better shape then it was when he inherited Clinton's recession.

But I guess yeah, he broke a promise. Silly him worrying about terrorism and such......

Actually, there is some new jobs.

Remember, when he made the promise to stimulate the economy no one could have envisioned the attack on the WTC and pentagon. So the original argument in the topic is flawed.

Secondly, the economy isn't at its worst. Its in better shape then it was when he inherited Clinton's recession.

But I guess yeah, he broke a promise. Silly him worrying about terrorism and such......
Bush has spent $700 Billion to try and "stimulate the economy", and the result is a NET LOSS of 900,000 jobs. Good plan. :eek:

BTW, when Bush took over from Clinton, the unemployment rate was 3.9%, and over 23 Million jobs had been "created", without massive tax cuts, with a higher rate of inflation, and much higher interest rates.

Your turn......

Okay, so you have to get three buses and walk half a mile to work in a job you hate, and you think this is a good state of affairs? You know, you're right! If only everybody thought like you, the elite could forget about resentment forever and just live off the underclass in comfort and security, safe in the knowledge that the commoners are pleased and proud to have miserable lives. It'll be almost as good as mediaeval Russia!

No, I beleive what he was saying is that sometimes you just gotta do what you gotta do, and be thankful for what you have, not so green for what others have. Instead work your way to a comfortable place for yourself.

By the way when you say elite living off the underclass, do you really beleive that people who make over say 100 grand a year are just drooling to get to the "underclasses" money?

No one has ever been pleased or proud to have miserable lives, rather, not everyone is interested in mine or your idea of what makes a full happy life.
Why shouldn't a plumber, teacher, senator, waste engineer, doctor, car salesman, or custodian not each take equal pride in their jobs as long as they give it their best and it provides for their basic needs. I for one have always taken pride in my work, washing dishes, working at 7-11, tossing pizzas, working a warehouse, being unemployed, insurance sales, selling cars, a retail sales associate, bank teller, retail store manager, a waiter, or prep cook. Taking responsibility for yourself and your position in life tends to take the edge off, the good thing? You get to be in charge of where you go from there. :)

Rob

Bush has spent $700 Billion to try and "stimulate the economy", and the result is a NET LOSS of 900,000 jobs. Good plan. :eek:

BTW, when Bush took over from Clinton, the unemployment rate was 3.9%, and over 23 Million jobs had been "created", without massive tax cuts, with a higher rate of inflation, and much higher interest rates.

Your turn......

http://www.nationalreview.com/nrof_comment/carter200402260852.asp

Bush did inhereit a recession however you look at it. This is a full report but all that really matters is the numbers, comparing Bush and Clinton's first term numbers. The reason I'm comparing it is because many liberals I speak to say that Clinton was great for the economy.

Hmm...all I see you people say is "tax cuts for the wealthy". Maybe if you had a neuron or two you would be able to make a little cash instead of living as a bitch of the welfare program, and then you would say: what the hell do you know, supporting all these poor, unemployed Democrats is really starting to piss me off!

Hmm...if you got a 9/11 economy, I would pay money to see how YOU could make it better. How would you, huh? Cut outsourcing? HA! If you think Bush is the only presidential nominee in this election that gets big cash from the major outsourcing corporations, then think again: KERRY DOES TOO! And when you suddenly lose all the cash they've been funneling to your campaign...watch as you fall out of the polls and into Al Gore's lap!

Overall point: All you communist, socialist, left-wing posters in this thread...leave America. Go. Now. And see just how much you love/hate what Bush is giving us.

http://www.nationalreview.com/nrof_comment/carter200402260852.asp

Bush did inhereit a recession however you look at it. This is a full report but all that really matters is the numbers, comparing Bush and Clinton's first term numbers. The reason I'm comparing it is because many liberals I speak to say that Clinton was great for the economy.
Well considering that that is a GOP site that has twisted the numbers, I can see why you might be confused.

For example, Clinton inherited a 7.3% unemployment rate on January 1, 1993. By January 1, 1994, the unemployment rate was 6.6% and by January 1, 1995, the unemployment rate was 5.6%. This works out to a drop in unemployment by 1.7%.

Now lets look at Bush's record. Bush inherited a 4.2% unemployment rate on January 1, 2001. By January 1, 2002, the unemployment rate was 5.6%, and by January 1, 2003, the unemployment rate was 5.8%. This works out to an increase in unemployment by 1.6%.

This would mean that after 3 years if you want to compare Clinton's record with Bush's record, there is a gap of 1.7 + 1.6 = 3.3% difference.

You cannot merely take an average of the 3 years. That is absurd.

Perhaps this graph will show the inherent flaws of averaging. Note the steady rise of employment under Clinton's watch.

http://uspolitics.about.com/library/library/graphics/economics_private_june2.png

Hmm...all I see you people say is "tax cuts for the wealthy". Maybe if you had a neuron or two you would be able to make a little cash instead of living as a bitch of the welfare program, and then you would say: what the hell do you know, supporting all these poor, unemployed Democrats is really starting to piss me off!

Hmm...if you got a 9/11 economy, I would pay money to see how YOU could make it better. How would you, huh? Cut outsourcing? HA! If you think Bush is the only presidential nominee in this election that gets big cash from the major outsourcing corporations, then think again: KERRY DOES TOO! And when you suddenly lose all the cash they've been funneling to your campaign...watch as you fall out of the polls and into Al Gore's lap!

Overall point: All you communist, socialist, left-wing posters in this thread...leave America. Go. Now. And see just how much you love/hate what Bush is giving us.

Nice. What people don't realize is that welfare is cheaper than the health problems, crime and propert damage done by complete and utter destitution and despair. Inner cities would become a crime zone reminiscent of the Middle East. History shows that good people can be pushed over the edge by desperation and deprivation.

Funny that you love America so much, but you don't know how it works. For one, Both Bush and Kerry are now locked into $75 million in public funds until election day. There's no contributed cash to pull from them.

Fighting against the overwhelming economic and political power of the wealthy is not Communism...in fact, one cannot have a functioning Democracy unless the power of the few is always kept in careful check.

If you think there are ANY political figures as beholden to the recklessly powerful corporate interests as G W Bush, then you need to wake up from your long slumber. I assume you've been sleeping for a long time, since you're spouting McCarthyistic rhetoric.

I'm not going to make generalizations as to all people who share a political theory similar to yours, but I will say something to you personally: Learn how to play nice with people who have differing political points-of-view than you, because THAT is what America is all about, and if you don't believe that, then you're not in America, no matter what soil is beneath your feet.

Jerkwad.

Hmm...all I see you people say is "tax cuts for the wealthy". Maybe if you had a neuron or two you would be able to make a little cash instead of living as a bitch of the welfare program, and then you would say: what the hell do you know, supporting all these poor, unemployed Democrats is really starting to piss me off!

Hmm...if you got a 9/11 economy, I would pay money to see how YOU could make it better. How would you, huh? Cut outsourcing? HA! If you think Bush is the only presidential nominee in this election that gets big cash from the major outsourcing corporations, then think again: KERRY DOES TOO! And when you suddenly lose all the cash they've been funneling to your campaign...watch as you fall out of the polls and into Al Gore's lap!

Overall point: All you communist, socialist, left-wing posters in this thread...leave America. Go. Now. And see just how much you love/hate what Bush is giving us.
Only Democrats are unemployed? Only Democrats are on welfare? Interesting comments.

Prove Kerry's ties to large multi-nationals please.

BTW, apparently, these "tax cuts for the wealthy" are not creating 6 Million jobs. We are talking about George "Hoover" Bush's failed tax cut policy or as his daddy called them...Voodoo Economics!!

Prove Kerry's ties to large multi-nationals please.

He's married to the Ketchup Queen. H.J.Heinz has factories all over the world.

BTW, apparently, these "tax cuts for the wealthy" are not creating 6 Million jobs. We are talking about George "Hoover" Bush's failed tax cut policy or as his daddy called them...Voodoo Economics!!

Apparently 30 grand a year makes me wealthy...

You've had what, 2 official warnings now? You don't seem to get it. Any more flaming from you, and you're gone. Forumbanned for a length of time left to my discretion. Do I make myself absolutely clear?


http://www.satanstephen.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/EyeOfMyrth.jpg
Myrth
The Eye of Myrth is upon thee
Forum Moderator

You make it clear that your not much different than most moderators on these boards. You make it clear that Liberals can say and do anything they want everyday, but if you defend yourself and your point of view and your a Republican then your not welcomed on these boards. I already know that, so what is your point?

Only Democrats are unemployed? Only Democrats are on welfare? Interesting comments.

Prove Kerry's ties to large multi-nationals please.

BTW, apparently, these "tax cuts for the wealthy" are not creating 6 Million jobs. We are talking about George "Hoover" Bush's failed tax cut policy or as his daddy called them...Voodoo Economics!!

Dunno, those tax cuts put cash in my pocket. I like that.

As for jobs creation, you can blame the recession that started when Clinton was the lame duck. I don't blame Clinton; it's pointless to point your finger at a guy who had no economic policy to speak of after 1994.

You make it clear that your not much different than most moderators on these boards. You make it clear that Liberals can say and do anything they want everyday, but if you defend yourself and your point of view and your a Republican then your not welcomed on these boards. I already know that, so what is your point?
You went overboard? Just a tad? :eek:

He's married to the Ketchup Queen. H.J.Heinz has factories all over the world.
Does Kerry receive funding from multi-nationals? Mrs. Kerry no longer has control of Heinz btw. So back up the statement?

Apparently 30 grand a year makes me wealthy...
I think the point went over your head?

Dunno, those tax cuts put cash in my pocket. I like that.

As for jobs creation, you can blame the recession that started when Clinton was the lame duck. I don't blame Clinton; it's pointless to point your finger at a guy who had no economic policy to speak of after 1994.

Unfortunately this is the weakest recovery we've seen, war or no war, recession or no recession (one very well can't have a recovery without a recession, can one?) that we've seen in 70 years.

we're more than 3 years into the Bush Presidency. Time to stop blaming Clinton, people!

Well considering that that is a GOP site that has twisted the numbers, I can see why you might be confused.

For example, Clinton inherited a 7.3% unemployment rate on January 1, 1993. By January 1, 1994, the unemployment rate was 6.6% and by January 1, 1995, the unemployment rate was 5.6%. This works out to a drop in unemployment by 1.7%.

Now lets look at Bush's record. Bush inherited a 4.2% unemployment rate on January 1, 2001. By January 1, 2002, the unemployment rate was 5.6%, and by January 1, 2003, the unemployment rate was 5.8%. This works out to an increase in unemployment by 1.6%.

This would mean that after 3 years if you want to compare Clinton's record with Bush's record, there is a gap of 1.7 + 1.6 = 3.3% difference.

You cannot merely take an average of the 3 years. That is absurd.

Perhaps this graph will show the inherent flaws of averaging. Note the steady rise of employment under Clinton's watch.

http://uspolitics.about.com/library/library/graphics/economics_private_june2.png


Its also absurd to say that Bush hasn't done a great job with the economy considering the WTC attacks. Basically thats what I was pointing out with that report.

Its also absurd to say that Bush hasn't done a great job with the economy considering the WTC attacks. Basically thats what I was pointing out with that report.

That was 3 years ago, and this is still the worst recovery in 70 years, war or no war. When you get right down to it, even something as massive as the WTC is small when compared to the GDP of the entire nation. After 3 years, the WTC should not be causing this economic malaise. Bush's policies are.

The fact is, even when you factor in all the excuses, the economy should still be doing better than it is.

That was 3 years ago, and this is still the worst recovery in 70 years, war or no war. When you get right down to it, even something as massive as the WTC is small when compared to the GDP of the entire nation. After 3 years, the WTC should not be causing this economic malaise. Bush's policies are.

The fact is, even when you factor in all the excuses, the economy should still be doing better than it is.
It wasn't only the WTC that's kept the economy slow. You have general bankruptcy of many American Airliners, gas prices above $40/barrel, and a number of corporate scandels that popped into the sportlight all at once. The economy has taken hit after hit, and most of them are beyond any president's control.

It wasn't only the WTC that's kept the economy slow. You have general bankruptcy of many American Airliners, gas prices above $40/barrel, and a number of corporate scandels that popped into the sportlight all at once. The economy has taken hit after hit, and most of them are beyond any president's control.
Then why did Bush tell everyone that his tax cuts would create 6 Million new jobs?

Then why did Bush tell everyone that his tax cuts would create 6 Million new jobs?

Simple: Bush lies.

Hmm, I hear no dissent from the right-wingers. My last statement must meet with their approval.

No, he has not lied yet.

You must wait for his term to be fully over to see if infact he did lie.

Now gimme a cookie.

No, he has not lied yet.

You must wait for his term to be fully over to see if infact he did lie.

Now gimme a cookie.


So you're saying he's gonna add 6 million jobs in the next few months? Whatever you are smoking must be illegal.

So you're saying he's gonna add 6 million jobs in the next few months? Whatever you are smoking must be illegal.


You know, I could really smell marijuana on my street tonight.........

So you're saying he's gonna add 6 million jobs in the next few months? Whatever you are smoking must be illegal.

No, what I am saying is that cannot call him a liar until his term is over.

I win the war on technicalities.

No, what I am saying is that cannot call him a liar until his term is over.

I win the war on technicalities.

He's a liar.

See, I just did.

I win on a technicality.

Didn't Kerry say he was going to add 10 million jobs? How's he going to do that, with his protectionist and tax-hiking fiscal policy? LOL!

Didn't Kerry say he was going to add 10 million jobs? How's he going to do that, with his protectionist and tax-hiking fiscal policy? LOL!

Source? Hey, Clinton added 22 million jobs in his 8 years. That's a whole lot beeter than Bush-boy.

I'm willing to give Kerry a shot, since he has the support of many highly thought of economists, not to mention Buffet and Iacoca.

Bush obviously can't get the job done.

Here's an idea, why don't you check out Kerry's actual economic plan? Or would that be too logical?

Source? Hey, Clinton added 22 million jobs in his 8 years. That's a whole lot beeter than Bush-boy.

I'm willing to give Kerry a shot, since he has the support of many highly thought of economists, not to mention Buffet and Iacoca.

Bush obviously can't get the job done.

Here's an idea, why don't you check out Kerry's actual economic plan? Or would that be too logical?

Presidents have very little control over employment itself, their policies however do affect growth. If you differentiate growth over the past decade you'd see that Clinton's lack of real fiscal policies caused the recession of 2001.

I heard Kerry talk about his "plans"; nothing but protectionist garbage. His blatant pandering to the unions means that he cannot be a pro-free trade president. His Keynesian theories are so out-of-whack you'd think he's stuck in the 20's.

Presidents have very little control over employment itself, their policies however do affect growth. If you differentiate growth over the past decade you'd see that Clinton's lack of real fiscal policies caused the recession of 2001.

I heard Kerry talk about his "plans"; nothing but protectionist garbage. His blatant pandering to the unions means that he cannot be a pro-free trade president. His Keynesian theories are so out-of-whack you'd think he's stuck in the 20's.

Presidents have very little control over employment? Then why did Bush promise to add 6 million jobs?

Wait, we just went over this in this very thread. RIF.

Presidents have very little control over employment? Then why did Bush promise to add 6 million jobs?

Wait, we just went over this in this very thread. RIF.

More campaign soundbites. I ignore them.

Clinton got lucky with the economy, he had absolutely nothing to do with the explosive growth of the computing industry which drove much of the economic growth during the 90's. At the moment it is hard to gauge if Bush had anything to do with the recovery of 2003. I'm not going to make a judgement on that issue yet.